Skip to main content
Internet Archive's 25th Anniversary Logo

Full text of "The Scotch-Irish : or, The Scot in North Britain, north Ireland, and North America"

See other formats













XTbe IRnicfterbocfeer press 



Copyright, 1902 



Zbe twtcherbocfcer press. View tfocfe 









" °! 


THESE volumes are designed to serve as an introduction to a series of 
Historical Collections which the writer expects hereafter to publish, 
relating to the early Scotch-Irish settlements in America. They are not in- 
tended as a history of the Scotch - Irish people, for such a work would 
require more time and labor than have been expended upon the present 

The subject is one, like that of the history of America itself, which must 
wait for some future gifted historian ; but unlike the subject of American 
history in general, it is also one concerning which no comprehensive treat- 
ment has ever been attempted. Such being the case, in order to enable the 
reader to understand the relation of the Scotch-Irish to American history, 
it has seemed necessary to make a brief general survey of the origin and 
old-world history of the race to which the Scotch-Irish belong. 

In doing this, it has not been his purpose to attempt even an outline 
sketch of the history of Scotland, but merely to condense and connect the 
record of its most important events, and indicate some of the principal 
writers upon different aspects of its history. 

The fact is, that the lack of acquaintance of many native-born Americans 
with the details of Scottish history is such that they require an elemen- 
tary grounding even in the annals of its most noteworthy events. Such 
a primer the writer has undertaken to prepare. In doing so, he has found 
it advisable to compile, epitomize, and consolidate a number of the most 
compact of the sketches of Scottish history which have appeared in Great 
Britain, using for this purpose the writings of William F. Skene and of E. 
William Robertson, the Annals of Lord Hailes, the brief history of Mack- 
intosh and, for the topographical and ethnographical description of Scot- 
land of the present day, the works of the French geographer and traveller, 
J. J. E. Reclus, of which an edition in English has been published by 
Messrs. D. Appleton & Company. 

The written history of the Scots in Ireland is in very much the same 
condition as their history in America. Few attempts have been made to 
record it; and for this reason, very little of their history can be presented. 
What is given has been condensed chiefly from Harrison's monograph on 
The Scot in Ulster; from Latimer's and Reid's histories of the Irish Presby- 
terians; and from Hill's Plantation of Ulster. The most valuable features of 
the present volumes in this connection will be found to be the contemporary 
documents and reports relating to the inception and progress of the coloni- 
zation of Northern Ireland by the Scots. 

Scottish history, as has been intimated, is as a sealed book to the great 
majority of American readers. In the United States, outside of the public 



libraries in perhaps two or three of the larger cities, it is difficult to find 
reprints of any of the original sources of information on the history of Scot- 
land, or indeed any commentaries on the subject, except occasional copies 
of the histories of Dr. William Robertson and Mr. John Hill Burton, neither 
of which is adapted to present requirements. For this reason, it has been 
deemed essential by the writer, in giving his references, to print the citations 
in full; as it seems probable that that is the only means of making them 
available to the greater part of his readers. 

New York, Dec. i, 1901. 



I — The Scotch-Irish and the Revolution i 

II — The Scotch-Irish and the Constitution . . .31 

III — The Scotch-Irish in American Politics ... 49 

IV — New England not the Birthplace of American Liberty 55 

V — Liberty of Speech and Conscience Definitely Estab- 
lished in America by Men of Scottish Blood . . 70 

VI — The American People not Racially Identical with 

those of New England ....... 78 

VII — American Ideals more Scottish than English . . 90 

VIII — The Scottish Kirk and Human Liberty ... 105 

IX — Religion in Early Scotland and Early England . 120 

X — Scottish Achievement 133 

XI — The Tudor-Stuart Church Responsible for Early 

American Animosity to England 146 

XII — Who are the Scotch-Irish ? 159 

XIII — Scotland of To-day ..... . . 169 

XIV — The Caledonians, or Picts 182 

XV — The Scots and Picts 199 

XVI — The Britons 224 

XVII — The Norse and Galloway 235 

XVIII— The Angles 265 

XIX — Scottish History in the English or Anglo-Saxon 

Chronicle 289 

XX — From Malcolm Canmore to King David . . .316 

XXI — William the Lion 338 

XXII — The Second and Third Alexanders to John Baliol . 352 


viii Contents 


XXIII — Wallace and Bruce 

XXIV — John of Fordun's Annals of Wallace and Bruce 

XXV — From Bruce to Flodden 

XXVI — The Beginning of the Reformation . 

, XXVII— The Days of Knox 

XXVIII — James Stuart, Son of Mary .... 
XXIX — The Wisest Fool in Christendom 

XXX — Scotland under Charles I 

XXXI — Scotland under Charles II. and the Bishops 
XXXII — Ireland under the Tudors .... 
XXXIII — The Scottish Plantation of Down and Antrim 
XXXIV — The Great Plantation of Ulster . 
XXXV — The Ulster Plantation from 1610 to 1630 
XXXVI — Stewart's and Brereton's Accounts of the Plan 

tation of Ulster 

XXXVII — Church Rule in Ireland and its Results 
XXXVIII — Londonderry and Enniskillen .... 
XXXIX — The Emigration from Ulster to America 









Acknowledgments are due to the publishers hereinafter named for 
their courtesy in permitting the use. in text and notes, of extracts from their 
publications, as follows : 

To Messrs. D. Appleton & Co., publishers of Recluses The World and Its Inhabitants, 
Bancroft's History of the United States, and Lecky's England in the XVIIIth Century. 

To Messrs. William Blackwood & Sons, publishers of Burton's History of Scotland, 
Harrison's Scot in Ulster, MacKerlie's Galloway : Ancient and Modern, and Maxwell's His- 
tory of Dumfries and Galloway. 

To James Cleland, publisher, and W. T. Latimer, author, of Latimer's History of the 
Irish Presbyterians. 

To David Douglas, publisher of Robertson's Scotland under Her Early Kings, and 
Skene's Celtic Scotland. 

To Joseph Foster, editor of Members of the Scottish Parliament. 

To Samuel Swett Green, author and publisher of The Scotch-Irish in America. 

To Messrs. Macmillan & Co., Limited, London, publishers of Green's Short History of 
England, Making of England, Conquest of England, and General History of England.. 

To Messrs. Harper & Brothers, publishers of Campbell's The Puritan in Holland, Eng- 
land, and America, Freeman's Origin of the English Nation, and Green's Short History of 
England, Conquest o.f England, and Alaking of England. 

To Messrs. Houghton, Mifflin & Co., publishers of Adams's Massachusetts : Its 
Historians and Its History, Fiske's Critical Period of American History, and Winsor's 
Narrative and Critical History of America. 

To Messrs. J. B. Lippincott & Co., publishers of Fisher's Evolution of the Constitution 
of the United States. 

To Messrs. Longmans & Co. and Messrs. Charles Scribner's Sons, publishers of Froude's 
English in Ireland. 

To Messrs. Longmans & Co., publishers of Lecky's England in the XVIIIth Century. 

To the Presbyterian Board of Publication, publishers of Breed's Presbyterians and the 
Revolution, Craighead's Scotch and Irish Seeds in American Soil, and Moffat's The Church 
in Scotland. 

To Oliver P. Temple, author of The Covenanter , Cavalier, and Puritan. 

To James Thin, publisher of Cunningham's Church History of Scotland. 

To T. Fisher Unwin, publisher of Rhys's The Welsh People. 




THE term " Scotch-Irish " is peculiarly American, and in tracing its ori- 
gin we have, epitomized, the history of the people to whom it is now 
applied. The word seems to have come into general use since the Revolu- 
tion, having been first taken as a race-name by many individuals of a very 
large class of people in the United States, descendants of emigrants of Scot- 
tish blood from the North of Ireland. The name was not used by the first 
of these emigrants, neither was it generally applied to them by the people 
whom they met here. 1 They usually called themselves " Scotch," just as the 
descendants of their former neighbors in Northern Ireland do to-day ; and 
as do some of their own descendants in this country, who seemingly are 
averse to acknowledging any connection with Ireland. 3 The Quakers and 
the Puritans generally spoke of them as " the Irish," * and, during the Revo- 
lutionary period, we find a large and influential body of these people joined 
together at Philadelphia, in the formation of a patriotic association to 
which they gave the distinctively Irish title, " The Society of the Friendly 
Sons of St. Patrick." 4 

The appellation " Scotch- Irish " is not, as many people suppose, an indi- 
cation of a mixed Hiberno-Scottish descent ; although it could be properly 
so used in many cases. It was first appropriated as a distinctive race-name 
by, and is now generally applied to, the descendants in America of the early 
Scotch Presbyterian emigrants from Ireland. These Scotch people, for a 
hundred years or more after 1600, settled with their wives and families in 
Ulster, in the North of Ireland, whence their descendants, for a hundred 
years after 1700, — having long suffered under the burdens of civil and religi- 
ous oppression imposed by commercial greed and despotic ecclesiasticism, 
— sought a more promising home in America. 

It has been remarked by some recent observers in this country that while 
American history has been chiefly written in New England, that section has 
not been the chief actor in its events. 

No doubt the second part of this proposition would be disputed by a large 


2 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

number of American people as not substantiated, who would perhaps claim 
that their position was supported by the testimony of a majority of the writers 
on the subject. With the latter claim it is not my purpose to take issue. Yet 
the first part of the proposition is more lacking in substantiation than the 
second. For, while it is apparent that the natural spirit of self-assertion, so J 
early manifested by the descendants of the English Puritans, has found - 
expression in a lengthy series of recitals of the doings and virtues of New 
England men, it is no less evident that these portrayals are largely of 
restricted application, and, for the most part, can only be considered 
as contributions to that portion of American history which is called local. 

That these writings have ever been taken as national history arises per- 
haps from a conjunction of two causes, or conditions. The first of these, and 
one that naturally would have been ineffective without the other, is the 
marked tendency on the part of many New England writers to ignore or be- 
little the presence of any element not within the range of their own immedi- 
ate horizon. In this they are peculiarly English, and exhibit that trait which 
has become so characteristic of the native English as to take its name from 
their geographical situation, namely — insularity. The second cause, which 
will be more fully adverted to hereafter, arises from the comparative dearth 
of historical writings originating outside of the Puritan colonies. 

The New England fathers came to a strange coast and found stretching 
back from the shore a forbidding wilderness, to them of such unknown 
depth that it was not until after a slow and gradual pushing forward of the 
frontier line for a period extending over a century and a half that 
their children found this wilderness was unsubdued only as far west as the 
Hudson River ; 6 and fully another century elapsed before many of them were 
willing to acknowledge this .to be the case. To the fathers, accordingly, 
New England meant America, and to some of the sons who stayed at home it 
is not unnatural that the western boundary line of America should seem to 
be fixed at the point where the early Dutch settlements began. 

In the examination of the contributions of the New England writers to 
the " history of America," therefore, it is only necessary to bear in mind the 
restricted sense in which so many of them use this term, and to observe their 
superficial treatment of men and affairs not within their own provincial 
boundaries, to enable us to accept these contributions at their true value. 
Hence we can take pride with the New Englanders in the noble deeds which 
they narrate of their fathers and of the good these fathers wrought for their 
own communities, and can thus understand the nature and extent of New 
England's contribution to the good of our country as a whole. 

It is, however, this inevitable disposition on the part of New England 
writers in their treatment of American history to magnify local at the ex- 
pense of national affairs, to which may be attributed so much of the present 
adverse criticism of their authority. If it be said that this tendency is only 
a natural manifestation of the dominating Anglo-Saxon spirit, which brooks 

The Revolution 3 

no rivalry and sees no good in anything foreign to itself, it may properly be 
answered that the page of impartial history is no place for such display. 8 
The share of New England in making American history is great ; but it is 
perhaps not so great as its chroniclers would have us believe. Neither can 
it be said by any fair-minded student that the events which took place on the 
soil of New England are of chief interest or importance in connection with 
the progress and success of the American War of Independence, and the 
foundation of our present system of government subsequent thereto, even 
though the record of those events forms the substance of a majority of the 
books which have been called American history. 

A notable instance of this one-sided treatment of our country's history, if 
not of its actual perversion, on the part of all but the most recent writers, 
treating the subject from a New England standpoint, is that furnished by cer- 
tain tables purporting to give the numbers of troops supplied by the different 
colonies in the Revolutionary War. These tables have appeared in whole or 
in part a great many times during the past sixty years, and until recently have 
been quite generally cited to show the superior patriotism of New Hampshire, 
Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut over that of the other colo- 
nies, and to sustain the claim, repeatedly made, that New England furnished 
more than half the soldiers in that struggle. The tables first appeared in the 
Collections of the New Hampshire Historical Society for 1824., vol. i., p. 236 ; 
then in the American Almanac for 1830, p. 187, and for i8ji, p. 1 12; in Niles 's 
Register for July 31, 1830 ; in Sabine's Loyalists of the Revolution, in 1847, p. 
31 ; in Lossing's Field Book of the Revolution, vol. ii., p. 837 ; in Hildreth's 
History of the United States, vol. iii., p. 441 ; in Barry's Massachusetts, vol. ii., 
p. 304 ; in Greene's Historical View of the American Revolution, p. 455 ; etc. T 
They are supposed to be founded on a report made to Congress, May n, 
1790, by Henry Knox, then Secretary of War ; but they contain only a 
portion of the figures given in that report, and utterly ignore and omit the 
part relating to the enlistment and service of certain southern troops com- 
posing, perhaps, one fourth of the entire army. The compilers of the tables 
also attempt to summarize the portion given, by adding up the aggregates of 
the various enlistment rolls for the whole Revolutionary period (many of 
which in the early part of the war were duplicated more than four times in 
a single year, the same names appearing at every ninety-days' re-enlistment), 
and then claiming that the results reached give the total number of Regulars 
furnished by the different colonies in the struggle. This erroneous sum- 
mary appears as follows : 

New Hampshire 12,496 

Massachusetts 67,807' 

Rhode Island 5,908 

Connecticut 3 r >939 

New York 17,781 

New Jersey 10,726 

Carried forward 146,657 

4 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

Brought forward 146,657 

Pennsylvania 25,678 

Delaware 2,386 

Maryland 13,912 

Virginia 26,678 

North Carolina 7,263 

South Carolina 6,417 

Georgia 2,679 


The report on which these tables are said to be founded is published in 
the American State Papers, vol. i., pp. 14-19, of the series relating to Mili- 
tary Affairs ; and in order to show the falsity of the statements based upon 
the garbled and incomplete extract made from it in the aforesaid tables, the 
report is here given in full and the figures accompanying the same appear 
in tabulated form on the opposite page. This tabulation, it may be re- 
marked, shows the form in which the incomplete statement appears, as well 
as the full report, — the figures here printed in heavy-faced type being 
omitted from all of the former tables since the first report of Knox. 


Communicated to the House of Representatives > May 11, 1790. 

War Office of the United States, May 10, 1790. 

In obedience to the order of the House of Representatives, the Secretary 
of War submits the statement hereunto annexed of the troops and militia 
furnished from time to time by the several States, towards the support of the 
late war. 

The numbers of the regular troops having been stated from the official 
returns deposited in the War Office, may be depended upon ; and in all 
cases where the numbers of militia are stated from the returns, the same 
confidence may be observed. 

But in some years of the greatest exertions of the Southern States there 
are no returns whatever of the militia employed. In this case recourse has 
been had to letters of the commanding officer, and to well informed indi- 
viduals, in order to form a proper estimate of the numbers of the militia in 
service ; and although the accuracy of the estimate cannot be relied on, yet 
it is the best information which the Secretary of War can at present obtain. 
When the accounts of the militia service of the several States shall be 
adjusted it is probable that the numbers will be better ascertained. 

There are not any documents in the War Office from which accurate re- 
turns could be made of the ordnance stores furnished by the several States 
during the late war. The charges made by the several States against the 
United States, which have been presented by the commissioners of accounts, 
are, probably, the only evidence which can be obtained on the subject. 

All of which is humbly submitted to the House of Representatives. 

H. Knox, Secretary of War. 

vQ O 


co O 


H O 

o o 

100 O 

O O 
co o 

M O 

co o 

en o 

r^ O 

O o 

I o 

i( paqsiiunj sjbj 
-n2a>i io3JbS3j3 

o o 

& ° 

. IT] 

Ojifl o>o 

co io «o <>o 








- 3 v„ 


2 ^ 





2 N 

^ m" 

M "• 


N c> 

1 en 


\H **& 
















o g 






























U c 


*-*j a 










T*- O 






o g 









o o 

















cm 5 

M M 






























•i 3 























5 "S 












O <u 





U c 





co O 




o O 





o o 
o o 




o o 
o o 








co >o 






•i « 




I en 








o g 


! e<-> 
















i «n 





U c 









vfi O 










2. o 




■— > 






^ o 







N M 




•rt rt 















£ e 








Tt . 

















q <u 








O c 





























M Tt 
































S c 














O <u 









U a 



M O 

m o 





M O 


in o 






M o 






co o 



"2 9 




j— < 

2 N 









SJ o 





M Csl 






N N 



M "t- 



•_i c-s 















-j +j 













5 c 














O <u 








U B 




2 © 



u^ O 











2 o 


en o 

f IO C7> 










r^ © 

t^tsi CO 













H «h 









"- w 


























5 "S 











O <u 











U « 





























































































6 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

It should be observed that the column of aggregate footings which appears 
at the right side of the table is not to be found in the original report of Gen- 
eral Knox. This column gives the erroneous summary of the successive 
enlistment rolls, already referred to; but these rolls cannot be added together 
for the purpose of showing the number of troops furnished with any more 
propriety than we can add the population of Massachusetts in 1776 to that 
of the same State in 1777, 1778, 1779, 1780, and 1781 for the purpose of find- 
ing out the number of people who lived there during the Revolution. We 
might attempt to make an approximation of the average number of troops 
from each State by dividing the aggregates of the complete returns by the total 
number of years, but this would only afford a conjectural average upon which 
no reliance could be placed ; for besides the fact that Knox's militia returns 
are mainly estimated, many of the early Continental enlistments, as has been 
already stated, were made for only three months at a time, and either re- 
newed at the expiration of the term by re-enlistment, or the ranks filled by 
fresh levies ; or, as was more generally the case during 1775 and 1776, the 
Continental ranks were so frequently depleted by desertions that to ascribe 
an/ average service of one month to each man enlisted therein during the 
first eighteen months of the war would perhaps be nearer a true statement 
of the fact than to set the service of each individual at from three to twelve 
months. The militia estimates, however, as General Knox states, approxi- 
mate the numbers actually serving, and are not, as in the case of the Conti- 
nentals, merely records of enlistments. It will also be noticed that these 
militia reports do not refer to the minutemen or militiamen who did not serve, 
but the estimates are of those who were actually called out and saw service 
in the field. In the South this service was perhaps harder and more fatal — 
and relatively much more effective — than that of the Continental line in the 
North, for the reason that the patriots of the South had to contend not only 
with the invading armies from abroad, but also with the armed forces of 
their Tory neighbors at home, whose numbers often exceeded their own, and 
the cruelty and brutality of whose attacks were surpassed only by the savage 
atrocities of another of Great Britain's hired auxiliaries — the native Indians. 8 

The fact is that these tables of Knox, as they now exist, are of little or 
no value whatever in giving a correct idea of the proportionate number of 
troops furnished by the different colonies. We know that Pennsylvania, for 
instance, had more than twenty thousand men in the Flying Camp, who saw 
service about New York, in 1776 ; yet Knox's tables show from Pennsylvania 
but little more than half that number, including both Continentals and 
militia. And that almost as many as twenty-five thousand were under arms 
in that State the year before is apparent from the testimony of Richard 
Penn given before Parliament in 1775. 9 

The following letter, received by the writer from the War Department at 
Washington in response to an inquiry for some explanation of Knox's 
figures, will serve to show how little reliance can be placed upon them : 

The Revolution 7 

September 2, 1897. 

Referring to your letter of the 26th ultimo, and its two enclosures, rela- 
tive to the number of men in service during the War of the Revolution, I 
have the honor to advise you as follows : 

Various tables and statements have been made up from the report of the 
Secretary of War of May 10, 1790, referred to in your letter, but I do not 
know of any one of them that is of any value or is entitled to any weight 
whatever. There is nothing on file in this Department which suggests any 
interpretation of the figures given in that report, and it is impossible to ascer- 
tain whether those figures represent the number of new enlistments during 
each year, or whether they include men who were in service at some time 
during the year but who enlisted in a prior year. In other words, it cannot 
be positively determined whether the figures merely represent additions to 
the force during each year, or whether they represent these additions to- 
gether with the force remaining in service from a prior year. It is certain 
that, in either case, they do not represent the total number of individuals 
added to the force in any year, or the total number of individuals in service 
in any year, because there must have been many duplications caused by 
counting the same man over again for each successive enlistment. As 
pointed out in the letter addressed to you by this office on the 9th ultimo, it 
is well known that a very large proportion of the men who served during 
the Revolution rendered two, three, or more terms, or " tours," of service. 
This was notably the case in militia organizations, in which men frequently 
served tours of a few days each at comparatively short intervals. . . . 

It will never be possible to determine with any approximation to accuracy 
the number of individuals who actually rendered military service during the 
Revolution. The records that have survived destruction and have been 
handed down to us are meagre in the extreme, but I do not believe that if 
every military record that was made during the Revolution had been pre- 
served so as to be available for reference at the present time, it would be 
possible to make even a reasonably accurate estimate of the number of men 
in service from any State or from all the States together. The records of 
that time were comparatively few, were imperfectly kept, and contained but 
little of the statistical information which is to be found in the records of 
later wars. But even in the case of the War of the Rebellion of 1861 to 
1865 it has been found impossible to determine accurately from all of the 
voluminous records that were kept the number of individuals who were in 
service from any State or from all the States. . . . 

No returns or other documents have been found in this Department from 
which the missing information, indicated on the list of organizations which 
accompanied your letter, can be supplied. 

The term "on command," as given on the published returns of the 
Revolutionary Army, is understood to be equivalent to the term " on de- 
tached service," as used at the present day, and the number of men so 
reported should be included with the number of " present and fit for duty " 
to determine the effective force of the Army. . . . 

Regretting my inability to be of more material service to you in con- 
nection with the subject of your inquiry, I am 

Very respectfully, 

F. C. Ainsworth, 
Colonel, U. S. Army, 
Chief, Record and Pension Office. 

8 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

Concerning the matter of desertions, the correspondence of Washington, 
in the latter part of 1776, contains numerous complaints of this evil, and in 
some of his letters of that period to Governor Trumbull he specifies the dis- 
tricts whose troops were most faulty in this respect. In the same connection, 
the following excerpt from an incomplete memorial prepared by General 
Steuben on the subject, and printed in Kapp's Life of Steuben (pp. 704, 705), 
is of great importance as presenting an official statement of the composition 
of the army from the Inspector-General himself. This memorial also shows 
that Steuben accounted for the frequent re-enlistments by suggesting the fre- 
quency of desertions : 

The respectable citizens who entered the lists with so much ardor, 
quitted their cabins with more regret to answer to the second call. Those 
who were in more easy circumstances emptied their purses to induce those 
who were poorer to take their places. The rotation of service soon became 
a speculation, and before the end of the second campaign there were very 
few rich enough to pay a substitute to serve in their stead. Associations 
were formed, and, by the force of money, children, invalids, and vagrants 
were engaged to complete the number of the contingents. These men were 
engaged for such short terms that one recruit soon took the place of another, 
and the country became quickly destitute of money. They then began to 
pay in produce. Negroes, cattle, produce, even lands, were given to recruits 
who were utterly useless to the army. 

Congress and the commander-in-chief remonstrated. The evil had be- 
come incurable. The soldiers whose term had expired could not be kept 
on at any price ; several withdrew in the middle, others at the end of the 
campaign. The enemy was always in full force, while the American Army 
was almost insufficient to furnish the guards for our advanced posts. The 
new recruit generally arrived when the operations of the war were far ad- 
vanced. He arrived in a wretched condition, destitute of every article of 
clothing, and utterly ignorant of a soldier's duty. Often a third of these 
new levies was totally unfit for service ; another third soon went into hos- 
pital ; and the remaining third was slightly trained during the time that the 
enemy employed in making his dispositions. 

In the third campaign the government was compelled to reduce to a 
considerable extent the number of regiments, from inability to recruit them. 
If the fate of America could have been decided in one day by a general 
engagement, it is possible that the enthusiasm of our valorous citizens might 
have achieved a victory over an army as brave as it was well disciplined. 
But a war is seldom finished by one or two battles. It is necessary to keep 
the field, and the hope of regaining advantages on another occasion tends to 
prolong the operations of the war. 

The citizen who had braved death at Bunker Hill could not resist the 
desire to see his family and take charge of his household. The hero in the 
battle of to-day became a deserter to-morrow, perfectly confident that he 
was not guilty of any impropriety. " I have had my turn," he used to say ; 
" I have fought bravely, let my neighbor do likewise. If five hundred thou- 
sand of my fellow citizens fire as many shots at the enemy as I have fired in 
the last battle, the enemy would be soon annihilated, and my country would 
be free." The neighbor, animated by the same sentiments, puts on his arms, 
joins the army, fills the vacancy, and asks nothing better than to fight and dis- 
tinguish himself. But a battle is not fought every day. He waits a week, 

The Revolution 9 

two, three, perhaps a month. He begins to long to see his family, his cabin, 
his land, which requires his presence to sow the crop or make his harvest. 
He fears to lose the produce of an entire year. His anxiety affects his health. 
There is nothing left for him but to go into hospital or go home. He re- 
turns to require some other neighbor to take his turn, and so on indefinitely. 
This rotation soon exhausts the village, but the war is not ended, and the 
enemy is getting ready for another campaign. 

The military establishment in 1775 consisted of three battalions of in- 
fantry from New Hampshire, as follows : those of Colonels Enoch Poor, 
James Reed, and John Stark ; twenty-seven from Massachusetts, as follows : 
Colonels Daniel Brewer, Jonathan Brewer, Theophilus Colton, Timothy 
Danielson, Ephraim Doolittle, John Fellows, James Frye, Thomas Gardner, 
Samuel Gerrish, John Glover, William Heath, Ebenezer Learned, Moses 
Little, John Mansfield, John Nixon, John Paterson, Edmund Phinney, 
William Prescott, Joseph Reed, Paul D. Sargent, James Scammon, John 
Thomas, Timothy Walker, Artemas Ward, Asa Whitcomb, Benjamin Wood- 
bridge ; three from Rhode Island, as follows : Colonels Thomas Church, 
Daniel Hitchcock, James Varnum ; eight from Connecticut, as follows : 
Colonels Benjamin Hinman, Jedediah Huntington, Samuel H. Parsons, 
Israel Putnam, Joseph Spencer, David Waterbury, David Wooster, Charles 
Webb ; four from New York, as follows : Colonels James Clinton, James 
Holmes, Alexander McDougall, Gosen Van Schaick ; two from New Jersey, 
as follows: Colonels William Alexander and William Maxwell; two from Penn- 
sylvania, as follows: Colonels John Bull and William Thompson; two from 
North Carolina, as follows : Colonels Robert Howe and James Moore ; and 
two from South Carolina, as follows : Colonels Christopher Gadsden and 
William Moultrie. There was also, besides these fifty-four battalions of in- 
fantry, one artillery regiment from Massachusetts under command of 
Colonels Joseph Gridley and Henry Knox. 

The infantry establishment of 1776 consisted of twenty-seven regiments 
of " Continentals " so-called, composed of one regiment from Pennsylvania : 
the 1st, under Colonel William Thompson ; three from New Hampshire : 
the 2d, Colonel James Reed ; 5th, Colonel John Stark ; 8th, Colonel Enoch 
Poor ; sixteen from Massachusetts : the 3d, Colonel Ebenezer Learned ; 4th, 
Colonels John Nixon and Thomas Nixon ; 6th, Colonel Asa Whitcomb ; 
7th, Colonel William Prescott ; 12th, Colonel Moses Little ; 13th, Colonel 
Joseph Reed ; 14th, Colonel John Glover ; 15th, Colonel John Paterson ; 
16th, Colonel Paul D. Sargent ; 18th, Colonel Edmund Phinney ; 21st, 
Colonel Jonathan Ward ; 23d, Colonel John Bailey ; 24th, Colonel John 
Greaton ; 25th, Colonel William Bond ; 26th, Colonel Loammi Baldwin ; 
27th, Colonel Israel Hutchinson ; two from Rhode Island : 9th, Colonel 
James Varnum ; nth, Colonel Daniel Hitchcock ; and five from Connecti- 
cut : 10th, Colonels Samuel H. Parsons and John Tyler; 17th, Colonel 
Jedediah Huntington ; 19th, Colonel Charles Webb ; 20th, Colonels Benedict 

io The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

Arnold and John Durkee ; 22d, Colonel Samuel Wyllys. There were also 
an additional regiment from New Hampshire, Colonel Seth Warner's, and 
one from Pennsylvania and Maryland, Colonel Nicholas Hausegger's, both 
afterwards included in the sixteen additional regiments raised under resolve 
of Congress of 27th December, 1776. Besides the Continental Line of 1776, 
the following States also furnished Continental troops in that year : New York 
Line, five regiments : 1st, Colonels Rudolphus Ritzema and Gosen Van 
Schaick ; 2d, Colonels G. Van Schaick and James Clinton ; 3d, Colonels James 
Clinton, Rudolphus Ritzema, and Peter Gansevoort ; 4th, Colonels Cornelius 
Wynkoop and Henry Livingston ; 5th, Colonel Lewis Dubois ; New Jersey 
Line, four regiments : 1st, Colonels William Alexander, William Winds, and 
Silas Newcomb ; 2d, Colonels William Maxwell and Israel Shreve ; 3d, 
Colonel Elias Dayton ; 4th, Colonels Ephraim Martin and David Brearley 
(Lieutenant-Colonel); Pennsylvania Line, seven battalions: 1st, Colonel John 
P. De Haas; 2d, Colonels Arthur St.Clair and Joseph Wood; 3d,Colonels John 
Shee and Lambert Cadwallader ; 4th, Colonel Anthony Wayne ; 5th, Colonel 
Robert Magaw ; 6th, Colonel William Irvine ; 7th, Colonel Samuel Miles, 
Rifle Battalion; and five additional regiments : 8th, Colonel ^EneasMackay ; 
9th, Colonel James Irvine ; 10th, Colonel Joseph Penrose; nth, Colonel 
Richard Humpton ; 12th, Colonel William Cook ; Delaware Line, one regi- 
ment: Colonel John Haslet; Maryland Line, seven regiments : 1st, Colonels 
William Smallwood and Francis Ware ; 2d, Colonel Thomas Price ; 3d, 
Colonel Mordecai Gist ; 4th, Colonel Josiah C. Hall ; 5th, Colonel William 
Richardson ; 6th, Colonel Otho H. Williams ; 7th, Colonel John Gunby ; 
Virginia Line, fifteen regiments : 1st, Colonel James Reed ; 2d, Colonel 
William Woodford ; 3d, Colonels Hugh Mercer and George Weedon ; 4th, 
Colonels Adam Stephen and Thomas Elliott ; 5th, Colonels William Peachy 
and Charles Scott ; 6th, Colonel Mordecai Buckner ; 7th, Colonels William 
Dangerfield and William Crawford ; 8th, Colonel Peter Muhlenberg ; 9th, 
Colonels Charles Fleming and Isaac Reed ; 10th, Colonel Edward Stevens ; 
nth, Colonel Daniel Morgan ; 12th, Colonel James Wood; 13th, Colonel 
William Russell ; 14th, Colonel Charles Lewis ; 15th, Colonel David Mason ; 
North Carolina Line, nine regiments : 1st, Colonels James Moore and Francis 
Nash ; 2d, Colonels Robert Howe and Alexander Martin ; 3d, Colonel 
Jethro Sumner ; 4th, Colonel Thomas Polk ; 5th, Colonel John A. Lilling- 
ton ; 6th, Colonel Edward Buncombe ; 7th, Colonel James Hogan ; 8th, 
Colonel James Armstrong ; 9th, Colonel Abraham Shephard ; South Caro- 
lina Line, five regiments : 1st, Colonels Christopher Gadsden and Charles C. 
Pinckney ; 2d, Colonels William Moultrie and Isaac Motte ; 3d, Colonel 

William Thompson ; 4th, ; 5th, Colonel Isaac 

Huger ; Georgia Line, two regiments : 1st, Colonel Lachlan Mcintosh ; 2d, 
Colonel Joseph Habersham. Besides these eighty-nine regiments of infantry 
there were two artillery regiments : Colonels Richard Gridley and Henry 
Knox's Massachusetts Artillery and Colonel Charles Harrison's Virginia 

The Revolution n 

Artillery. There was also a regiment of light horse organized in Connecticut 
by Colonel Elisha Sheldon. 

In 1777 the New Hampshire Line contained three regiments under 
Colonels John Stark and Joseph Cilley, Enoch Poor, and Alexander 
Scammell ; the Massachusetts Line, sixteen, under Colonels Joseph Vose, 
John Bailey, John Greaton, William Shepard, Rufus Putnam, Thomas 
Nixon, Ichabod Allen, Michael Jackson, James Wesson, Thomas Marshall, 
Ebenezer Francis and Samuel Carlton (Lieutenant-Colonel), Edward 
Wigglesworth, Gamaliel Bradford, and Timothy Bigelow ; the Rhode Island 
Line, two, under Colonels Christopher Greene and Israel Angell ; the Con- 
necticut Line, eight, under Colonels Jedediah Huntington and Josiah Starr, 
Charles Webb, Samuel Wyllys, John Durkee, Philip B. Bradley, William 
Douglas and Return J. Meigs, Heman Swift, John Chandler ; the New York 
Line, five, under Colonels Gosen Van Schaick, Peter Van Cortland, Peter 
Gansevoort, Henry B. Livingston, and Lewis Dubois ; the New Jersey Line, 
four, under Colonels Mathias Ogden, Israel Shreve, Elias Dayton, and David 
Rhea (Lieutenant-Colonel) ; the Pennsylvania Line, thirteen, under Colonels 
Edward Hand and James Chambers, John P. De Haas, James Irvine and 
Henry Bicker, Joseph Wood and Thomas Craig, Lambert Cadwallader, 
Francis Johnston, Robert Magaw, William Irvine, ^Eneas Mackay and 
Daniel Brodhead, James Irvine and Anthony J. Morris and Richard But- 
ler, Joseph Penrose and James Chambers and Adam Hubley (Lieutenant- 
Colonel), Richard Humpton, William Cook and John Bull ; the Delaware 
Line, one, under Colonel David Hall ; the Maryland Line, seven, under 
Colonels John H. Stone, Thomas Price, Mordecai Gist, Josias Hall, William 
Richardson, Otho H. Williams, and John Gunby; the Virginia Line, fifteen, 
under Colonels James Reed and James Hendricks, William Woodford and 
Alexander Spotswood, George Weedon and Thomas Marshall, Thomas 
Elliott and Robert Lawson and Isaac Reed, Charles Scott and Josiah Par- 
ker, Mordecai Buckner and John Gibson, William Crawford and Alexander 
McClanachan, Peter Muhlenberg and Abraham Bowman and John Neville, 
Isaac Reed and George Matthews, Edward Stevens, Daniel Morgan, James 
Wood, William Russell, Charles Lewis, and David Mason ; the North Caro- 
lina Line, ten, under Colonels Francis Nash and Thomas Clarke, Alexander 
Martin and John Patton, Jethro Sumner, Thomas Polk, Edward Buncombe, 
Gideon Lamb, James Hogan, James Armstrong, John Williams, and Abra- 
ham Shephard ; the South Carolina Line, five, under Colonels Charles C. 

Pinckney, Isaac Motte, William Thompson, (4th), and Isaac 

Huger (5th) ; and the Georgia Line, four, under Colonels (1st), 

Samuel Elbert (2d), (3d), and John White (4th). Lieutenant- 
Colonel John Mcintosh commanded one of the Georgia regiments. 

In 1778 there were three infantry regiments from New Hampshire under 
Colonels Joseph Cilley, Nathan Hale, and Alexander Scammell ; fifteen 
from Massachusetts, all but the nth under the same colonels as in 1777 ; 

12 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

two from Rhode Island, under Greene and Angell ; eight from Connecticut, 
with the same colonels as in 1777, with the exception of the 2d, in which 
Zebulon Butler succeeded Charles Webb, and the 8th, in which Giles 
Russell succeeded John Chandler ; five from New York, under the colonels 
of 1777 ; four from New Jersey, under the colonels of 1777 ; thirteen from 
Pennsylvania, under the colonels of 1777, with the exception of the 2d, in 
which Walter Stewart succeeded Henry Bicker, the 10th, in which George 
Nagel first, and afterwards Richard Humpton, succeeded to the command, 
and the nth, which was disbanded and its place taken by Colonel Thomas 
Hartley's 4th Additional Continental Regiment ; one from Delaware, under 
Lieutenant-Colonel Joseph Vaughan ; seven from Maryland ; fifteen from 
Virginia, under Richard Parker (1st), Christopher Febiger (2d), William 
Heath (3d), Isaac Reed and John Neville (4th), Josiah Parker and Richard 
Russell (5th), John Gibson and John Greene (6th), Alexander McClanachan 
and Daniel Morgan (7th), John Neville and James Wood (8th), George 
Matthews and John Gibson (9th), John Green and William Davies (10th), 
Daniel Morgan and Abraham Buford (nth), James Wood (12th), William 
Russell (13th), Charles Lewis and William Davies (14th), and David Mason 
and Abraham Buford (15th) ; North Carolina, eight ; South Carolina, five ; 
Georgia, four, Lieutenant-Colonel John Mcintosh succeeding to command 
of the 3d, where he remained until the close of the war. 

In 1779, and thereafter, of the sixteen additional regiments raised under 
resolution of Congress of 27th December, 1776, the 2d and 3d (Virginia) 
were united under Nathaniel Gist ; the 4th (Pennsylvania) was designated 
as the nth Pennsylvania ; the 5th, 6th, and 7th (Massachusetts) were united 
under Henry Jackson, and became the 16th Massachusetts in 1780 ; the 8th 
and 1 2th (New Jersey) were united under Oliver Spencer, and the remainder 
seem mostly to have been continued by their respective States as additional 
regiments until 1781. The Massachusetts Line (fifteen regiments) remained 
substantially intact until 1781 ; as did those of New Hampshire (three regi- 
ments), Rhode Island (two regiments), and Connecticut (eight regiments), 
until the end of 1780. Lieutenant-Colonel Isaac Sherman succeeded Giles 
Russell in command of the 8th Connecticut in October, 1779 ; and the names 
of John Bailey (in 1780), Ichabod Allen (in 1778), Samuel Carlton (in 1778), 
and Edward Wigglesworth (in 1779) disappear as commanders of regiments 
from Massachusetts. There was no change in the number or commanders 
of the five regiments of New York from 1778 to 1781, excepting in the 
case of the 5th, where Marinus Willet succeeded Lewis Dubois in December, 
1779. In New Jersey, the 4th was probably incorporated with one of the 
additional regiments after 1778. In Pennsylvania, Morgan Connor succeeded 
William Irvine as commander of the 7th in May, 1779, and he was succeeded 
in January, 1780, by Josiah Harmar ; the 12th and 13th were disbanded 
before the close of 1778. In Delaware, Joseph Vaughan continued in 
command of the one regiment from that State to the close of the war. In 

The Revolution 13 

Maryland, Otho H. Williams was transferred to the command of the 1st and 
John Gunby to that of the 2d, in January, 1781 ; Lieutenant-Colonels John 
E. Howard and Thomas Woolford serving successively in the 5th up to Octo- 
ber, 1779, under Colonel William Richardson ; and Lieutenant-Colonel N. 
Ramsay succeeding Mordecai Gist as commander of the 3d at the beginning 
of 1779. In Virginia, the 12th, 13th, 14th, and 15th regiments were disbanded 
towards the close of 1778 ; William Davies became colonel of the 1st, 
Abraham Buford of the 2d, and John Gibson of the 7th, in February, 
1781 ; the 9th, 10th, and nth having also been disbanded. In North Caro- 
lina there are no returns from the 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, after 1778. In South 
Carolina, the 2d regiment seems to have been under command of Major 
Isaac Harleston after December, 1778, the 1st and 3d remaining unchanged 
to 1 781 ; there are no returns, lists, or rolls of the 4th to be found, but Isaac 
Huger continued as colonel of the 5th to June, 1779, and the regiment 
remained in service until 1781. The names of Colonels Francis Marion 
and David Hopkins also appear in orders. In Georgia, the 1st, 2d, and 3d 
regiments remained in service to the close of the war ; the 4th probably 
not later than 1779. 



The following returns are from the volumes of the Fifth Series of Ameri- 
can Archives : 

July, 1776. Monthly return of forces in South Carolina, vol. i., p. 632. 

September 27th. Return of Colonel William Smallwood's Maryland 
Regiment, vol. ii., p. 567. 

October 5th. Return of forces under Washington at Harlem Heights, 
vol. ii., p. 907. 

November 9th. Return of the forces in Northern Department under 
Gates, vol. iii., pp. 701, 702. 

December 1st. Return of forces under Washington at Trenton, vol. iii., 

December 22d. Return of the forces under Washington on the banks of 
the Delaware, vol. iii., pp. 1401, 1402. 

continentals : 8. Enoch Poor, N. H Nov. 

total. 9. James Varnum, R. I Oct. 

1. Edward Hand, Pa Oct. 5, 367 10. Sam'l H. Parsons, Ct Oct. 

2. James Reed, N. H Nov. 9, 221 II. Daniel Hitchcock, R. I. . Oct. 

3. Ebenezer Learned, Mass. Oct. 5, 474 12. Moses Little, Mass Oct. 

4. Thomas Nixon, Mass Oct. 5, 386 13. Joseph Read, Mass Oct. 

5. John Stark, N. H Nov. 9, 258 14. John Glover, Mass Oct. 

6. Asa Whitcomb, Mass Nov. 9, 308 15. John Paterson, Mass Nov. 

7. William Prescott, Mass. ..Oct. 5, 318 16. Paul D. Sargent, Mass... Oct. 5, 398 


















The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

17. Jedediah Huntington, Ct.Oct. 

18. Edmund Phinney, Mass.. Nov. 

19. Charles Webb, Conn Oct. 

20. John Durkee, Conn Dec . 

21. Jonathan Ward, Mass.... Oct. 

22. Samuel Wyllys, Conn Oct. 

23. John Bailey, Mass Oct. 

24. John Greaton, Mass Nov. 

25. William Bond, Mass Nov. 

26. Loammi Baldwin, Mass. . .Oct. 

27. Israel Hutchinson, Mass. .Oct. 
Knox's Artillery Oct. 


5, 230 

9. 3oi 

5, 428 

22, 371 

5, 435 

5, 391 

5, 394 

9, 476 

9, 164 

5, 378 

5, 489 

5, 341 



1. Gosen Van Schaick Nov. 9, 231 

2. James Clinton Oct. 5, 253 

3. Rudolphus Ritzema Oct. 5, 338 

4. Cornelius Wynkoop Nov. 9, 114 

5. Lewis Dubois 


1. Silas Newcomb Nov. 9, 165 

2. Israel Shreve. , Nov. 9, 225 

3. Elias Dayton Nov. 9, 540 

4. Ephraim Martin Oct. 5, 277 


1. John P. De Haas Nov. 9, 393 

2. Joseph Wood Nov. 9, 262 

3. Lambert Cadwallader. . . .Oct. 5, 336 

4. Anthony Wayne Nov. 9, 394 

5. Robert Magaw Oct. 5, 343 

6. William Irvine Nov. 9, 277 

Miles's Rifle Regiment. . .Oct. 5, 105 
Pennsylvania and Maryland 

German Regiment, Hau- 

segger's (one half) Dec. 22, 197 


1. John Haslet Oct. 5, 479 


1. William Smallwood Sept. 27, 

2. Maryland and Pennsylvania 

German Regiment, Hau- 
segger's (one half) Dec. 22, 


1. James Read Oct. 5, 

2. William Woodford 

3. George Weedon Oct. 5, 

4. Thomas Elliott Dec. 1, 

5. Charles Scott Dec. 1, 

6. Mordecai Buckner Dec. 1, 

7. William Crawford 

8. Peter Muhlenberg July 

9. Isaac Reed July 12, 

10. Edward Stevens 

11. Daniel Morgan 

12. James Wood . . 

Harrison's Artillery 


1. Francis Nash July 

2. Alexander Martin July 

3. Jethro Sumner July 

4. Thomas Polk 

5. Edward Buncombe 

6. John A. Lillington 

7. James Hogan 

8. James Armstrong 

9. John Williams 

3d Company Horse July 


1. Christopher Gadsden July 

2. William Moultrie July 

3. William Thompson July 

4. Artillery 

5. Isaac Huger July 

6 July 


1. Lachlan Mcintosh 

2. Samuel Elbert 


1. James Livingston 

2. Moses Hazen 






These returns, complete for all the New England regiments, show a total 
number in the Continental Line from that section in the fall of 1776 of about 
9500 men, or an average of 353 men to each of the twenty-seven New Eng- 
land regiments. The incomplete returns from the fifty-two regiments outside 

The Revolution 15 

of New England show a total of 11,004 men * n thirty-four regiments, an aver- 
age of 323 men in each. There are no returns in the archives of the War 
Department from the remaining eighteen regiments, but estimating that 
they contained an average of 300 men each, or 5400 in all, it would give a 
total effective force of " Regulars " in the American Army, before the loss of 
Fort Washington, of about 26,000 men, of whom thirty-seven per cent, were 
from New England. 

In the collections of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania is a folio 
manuscript volume, Abstracts of Muster-Rolls, prepared by direction of 
Deputy Muster-Master-General William Bradford, Jr., which contains the 
names of the field officers and officers commanding companies, with the 
strength of each company and regiment. This invaluable book, the cover of 
which is largely composed of muster-rolls dated at Valley Forge, gives the 
musters for the months of June, July, August, September, and October of 
1778, and January of 1779. The following is the muster for July of 1778, as 
it is in a more perfect condition than any of the others. 



First Regiment. — Colonel, Thomas Clark ; Lieutenant-Colonel, Ma- 
bane ; Major, Ashe ; Captains, Tatum, Dixon, Bowman, Read, McRees, 
Moore ; commissioned officers, 26 ; staff, 4 ; non-commissioned and privates, 

Second Regiment. — Colonel, John Patten ; Lieutenant-Colonel, Harney ; 
Major, Murpee ; Captains, Englis, Tenner, Coleman, Hall, Armstrong, Wil- 
liams ; commissioned officers, 27 ; staff, 5 ; non-commissioned and privates, 


Delaware Battalion. — Colonel, David Hall ; Captains, Patten, Anderson, 
Leavmonth, Kirkwood, Jaquett ; Lieutenants, Wilson, Powell, Rhodes ; 
commissioned officers, 29 ; staff, 5 ; non-commissioned and privates, 351. 


Lieutenant-Colonel, Aaron Burr ; Captains, Tom, Sandford, Hallet ; 
Lieutenants, Dove, Neely ; commissioned officers, 1 1 ; staff, 5 ; non-com- 
missioned and privates, SS. 

Major, William Harrison ; Captains, Wikoff, Burrows, Forman, Combs ; 
commissioned officers, 6 ; staff, 2 ; non-commissioned and privates, 73. 

Colonel, Oliver Spencer ; Captains, Broderick, Weatherby, Striker, Edsell, 
Pierson, Bommel ; Lieutenants, Meiker, Ogden ; commissioned officers, 14 ; 
staff, 4 ; non-commissioned and privates, 157. 

r At- Trtc 


1 6 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 


First Regiment. — Colonel, Joseph Cilley ; Captains, Taswell, Scott, Fry, 
Hutcheson, Wail, House, Emmerson, Morrell ; commissioned officers, 26 ; 
staff, 4 ; non-commissioned and privates, 476. 

Second Regiment. — Major, Benjamin Titcomb ; Captains, Drew, Carr, 
Norris, Rowell, Clay, Blodgett, Robinson ; Lieutenant, Hardy ; commis- 
sioned officers, 27 ; staff, 3 ; non-commissioned and privates, 368. 

Third Regiment. — Colonel, Alexander Scammell ; Captains, Livermore, 
Gray, Weiser, Fry, Stone, McClary, Bealls, Ellis ; commissioned officers, 
26 ; staff, 3 ; non-commissioned and privates, 333. 

Independent Corps. — Captain, Selir ; commissioned officers, 5 ; non- 
commissioned and privates, 44. 


First Regiment. — Colonel, Heman Swift ; Captains, Woodbridge, Wat- 
son, Hill, Converse, Beardsley, Chapman, Hale, Steven ; commissioned 
officers, 25 ; staff, 4 ; non-commissioned and privates, 398. 

Second Regiment. — Lieutenant-Colonel, Isaac Sherman; Captains, 
Parsons, Beebe, Manning, Hinkly, Betts, Walbridge, Mills, Parker ; com- 
missioned officers, 16 ; staff, 5 ; non-commissioned and privates, 289. 

Third Regiment. — Major, David Sill; Captains, Haney, Troop, Shum- 
way, Ely, Perkins, Richards, Darrow, Home ; commissioned officers, 23 ; 
staff, 5 ; non-commissioned and privates, 434. 

Fourth Regiment. — Colonel, Philip Bradley; Captains, Strong, Lacey, 
Wright, Sandford, Prior, Catlin, Childs, Harts ; commissioned officers, 23 ; 
staff, 4 ; non-commissioned and privates, 386. 

Fifth Regiment. — Major, Joseph Hait ; Captains, Monson, Brown, Rice, 
Brigham, Sandford, Smith, Comstock, Mattocks ; commissioned officers, 21 ; 
staff, 4 ; non-commissioned and privates, 336. 

Sixth Regiment. — Colonel, John Durkee (two companies detached) ; 
Captains, Bacon, Fitch, McGuire, Lee, Webb, Bile, Hallam, Harmar ; com- 
missioned officers, 26 ; staff, 5 ; non-commissioned and privates, 348. 


First Regiment. — Colonel, Gosen Van Schaick ; Captains, Finch, Hicks, 
Sherwood, Hogkish, Copp, McCracky, Graham, Wendall ; commissioned 
officers, 28 ; staff, 5 ; non-commissioned and privates, 454. 

Second Regiment. — Colonel, Philip Cortland; Captains, Wright, Ten 
Eyk, (late) Graham, Riker, (late) Hallet, Pell, Lounsbery ; Lieutenant, 
French ; commissioned officers, 23 ; staff, 4 ; non-commissioned and pri- 
vates, 413. 

Fourth Regiment. — Colonel, Henry Livingston ; Captains, Titus, Sack- 
ett, Gray, Strong, Smith, Walker, Davis ; Lieutenant, Elsworth ; commis- 
sioned officers, 20 ; staff, 4 ; non-commissioned and privates, ^8^. 

The Revolution 17 


Second Regiment. — Colonel, Israel Angell ; Captains, C. Olney, S. 
Olney, Dexter, Potter, Humphreys, Tew, Hughes, Allen (detachment of 
Colonel Green) ; commissioned officers, 27 ; staff, 4 ; non-commissioned 
and privates, 469. 


First Regiment. — Colonel, James Chambers ; Captains, Grier, Buchanan, 
Wilson, Hamilton, Simpson, Doyle, Craig, Wilson, Parr ; Lieutenant, 
Hughes ; commissioned officers, 25 ; staff, 2 ; non-commissioned and 
privates, 331. 

Second Regiment. — Colonel, Walter Stewart; Lieutenant - Colonel, 
Henry Miller ; Major, Murray ; Captains, Marshall, Ashmead, Howell, 
Bankson, Tolbert, ^Patterson ; commissioned officers, 24 ; staff, 3 ; non- 
commissioned and privates, 437. 

Third Regiment. — Colonel, Thomas Craig ; Captains, Craig, Moore, S. 
Moore, Butler, Rees, Christie, Holling, Epple ; commissioned officers, 12 ; 
staff, 4 ; non-commissioned and privates, 204. 

Fourth Regiment. — Lieutenant-Colonel, William Butler ; Captains, Con- 
nelly, Means, Burd, Williams, McGowan, Fishburn, Scull, Gray ; commis- 
sioned officers, 19 ; staff, 3 ; non-commissioned and privates, 217. 

Fifth Regiment. — Colonel, Francis Johnston ; Captains, Oldham, Christy, 
Smith, McHenry, Gregg, Seely, Potts, Bond, Bartholomew ; commissioned 
officers, 24 ; staff, 2 ; non-commissioned and privates, 300. 

Sixth Regiment. — Colonel, Josiah Harmar ; Captains, Mouser, Cruise, 

McCowan, Waugh, Humph, Bower, ; commissioned officers, 15 ; staff, 

5 ; non-commissioned and privates, 194. 

Seventh Regiment. — Colonel, William Irvine ; Captains, Bratton, Wil- 
son, Alexander, J. Alexander, Parker, Montgomery, Irwin, Miller ; commis- 
sioned officers, 26 ; staff, 1 ; non-commissioned and privates, 201. 

Ninth Regiment. — Colonel, Richard Butler ; Captains, Bowen, Irwin, 
Davis, Henderson, Grant, McClelland ; Lieutenant, Bickham ; commissioned 
officers, 21 ; staff, 5 ; non-commissioned and privates, 210. 

Tenth Regiment. — Colonel, Richard Humpton ; Lieutenant-Colonel, 
Hubley ; Major, Grier ; Captains, Stake, Lang, Sample, Weaver, Stout, 
Colhoon ; commissioned officers, 22 ; staff, 3 ; non-commissioned and 
privates, 342. 

Twelfth Regiment. — (Late William Cook); Captains, McElhatton, 
Lincoln, Patterson, Bohn, Miller, Ruby ; commissioned officers, 9 ; staff, 
4 ; non-commissioned and privates, 146. 


First Regiment. — Colonel, Mathias Ogden ; Captains, Mead, Piatt, Polhe- 
mus, Longstreet, Morrison, Baldwin, Angell ; Lieutenant, D. Hart ; 
commissioned officers, 22 ; staff, 5 ; non-commissioned and privates, 532. 

1 8 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

Second Regiment. — Colonel, Israel Shreve; Captains, Redding, Hollings- 
head, Sparks, Holmes, Cummings, Lucy, one company wanting ; commis- 
sioned officers, 20 ; staff, 5 ; non-commissioned and privates, 365. 

Third Regiment. — Colonel, Elias Dayton ; Captains, Ballard, Ross, 
Anderson, Patterson, Grifford (vacant), Cox, Mott ; commissioned officers, 
23 ; staff, 4 ; non-commissioned and privates, 473. 

Fourth Regiment. — Colonel, Ephraim Martin ; Captains, Anderson, 
Mitchell, Lyon, Forman ; Lieutenants, Johnston, Lloyd, Barton ; commis- 
sioned officers, 19 ; staff, 5 ; non-commissioned and privates, 321. 


First Regiment. — Colonel, John H. Stone ; Captains, Gaither, Rox- 
borough, Ewing, Winder ; Lieutenants, Smith, Bruce, Farnadis, Peal ; 
commissioned officers, 19 ; staff, 5 ; non-commissioned and privates, 374. 

Second Regiment. — Colonel, Thomas Price ; Captains, Anderson, Long, 
Davidson, Eccleston, Williams, Dent, Dorsey ; Lieutenant, Hardman ; 
commissioned officers, 16 ; staff, 4 ; non-commissioned and privates, 526. 

Third Regiment. — Colonel, Mordecai Gist ; Captains, Smith, Gist, Brice, 
Griffiths, Marbury, Brooks ; Lieutenants, Armstrong, Deaver, Clagett, Smith ; 
commissioned officers, 31 ; staff, 6 ; non-commissioned and privates, 461. 

Fourth Regiment. — Colonel, Josiah C. Hall ; Captains, Oldham, Selman, 
Lansdale, Goodman, Burgess, Smith, Norwood ; Lieutenants, Reilly, Smith ; 
commissioned officers, 23 ; staff, 5 ; non-commissioned and privates, 517. 

Fifth Regiment. — Colonel, William Richardson ; Captains, Hawkins, 
Hardey, Lynch, Johnston ; Lieutenants, Hamilton, Emory, Hand ; Ensign, 
Jones ; commissioned officers, 19 ; staff, 5 ; non-commissioned and privates, 


Sixth Regiment. — Colonel, Otho Williams ; Captains, Harris, Hyres, 
Dobson, D. Beal, Lawrence, Freeman, Myle, Ghislin ; commissioned officers, 
20 ; staff, 5 ; non-commissioned and privates, 391. 

Seventh Regiment. — Colonel, John Gunby ; Captains, Jones, Stull, 
Spyker, Grost, Morris, Bayley, Anderson ; Lieutenant, Beatty ; commissioned 
officers, 23 ; staff, 4 ; non-commissioned and privates, 369. 

German Battalion. — Lieutenant-Colonel, Ludwig Weltner ; Captains, 
Hubley, Bunner, Boyer, Baltzell ; Lieutenants, Cramer, Rice, Shugart, Boyer, 
Meyer ; commissioned officers, 20 ; staff, 4 ; non-commissioned and privates, 



First Regiment. — Colonel, Richard Parker ; Captains, Minnes, Conyng- 
ham, Lawson, Lewis ; commissioned officers, 22 ; staff, 5 ; non-commissioned 
and privates, 243. 

Second Regiment. — Colonel, Christian Febiger ; Captains, Harrison, Mc- 

The Revolution 19 

Calmis, Taylor, W. Taylor, Willis, Upshaw, Holmes, Parker ; commissioned 
officers, 23 ; staff, 5 ; non-commissioned and privates, 253. 

Third and Seventh Regiments. — Lieutenant-Colonel, William Heath ; 
Captains, Young, Hill, Blackwell, Peyton, Lipscomb, Powell, Briscoe ; 
Captain-Lieutenant, Baylor ; Lieutenant, Sayres ; commissioned officers, 
27 ; staff, 9 ; non-commissioned and privates, 556. 

Fourth and Twelfth Regiments. — Colonel, James Wood ; Lieutenant- 
Colonel, Nevil ; Major, Clark ; Captains, Lapsley, Still, Wall, Kirkpatrick, 
Waggoner, Croghan, Bowyer ; commissioned officers, 30 ; staff, 13 ; non- 
commissioned and privates, 752. 

Fifth Regiment. — Colonel, Joseph Parks ; Captains, Fowler, Anderson, 
Colston, Fauntleroy ; commissioned officers, 23 ; staff, 4 ; non-commissioned 
and privates, 182. 

Sixth Regiment. — Colonel, John Gibson ; commissioned officers, 17 ; 
staff, 5 ; non-commissioned and privates, 85. 

Ninth Regiment. — Lieutenant-Colonel, Burgess Ball ; commissioned 
officers, 10 ; staff, 1 ; non-commissioned and privates, 53. 

Tenth Regiment. — Colonel, John Greene ; Captains, Shelton, West, 
Stephens, Mountjoy, Spotswood, Blackwell, Gillison ; Lieutenant, Lamne ; 
commissioned officers, 23 ; staff, 4 ; non-commissioned and privates, 380. 

Eleventh and Fifteenth Regiments. — Colonel, David Meson ; Captains, 
Porterfield, Gregory, Ree, Gray ; Colonel, Cropper ; Major, Wallace ; 
Captains, Will, Johnston ; commissioned officers, 26 ; staff, 10 ; non- 
commissioned and privates, 584. 

Fourteenth Regiment. — Colonel, William Davis ; Captains, Conway, 
Reid, Robert, Winston, Overton, Marks, Jones, Thweat ; commissioned 
officers, 26 ; staff, 4 ; non-commissioned and privates, 390. 

First State Regiment. — Colonel, George Gibson ; Captains, Brown, Hamil- 
ton, Ewell, T. Ewell, Shields, Valentine, Armistead, Crump, Hoffler, Nicholas; 
commissioned officers, 29 ; staff, 4 ; non-commissioned and privates, 329. 

Second State Regiment. — Colonel, Gregory Smith ; Captains, Spiller, 
Dudley, Talifero, Quarles, Busse, Garnet, Barnard, Lewis ; commissioned 
officers, 26 ; staff, 4 ; non-commissioned and privates, 418. 

At Large. — Colonel, John Parke ; Captains, Bicker, Prowel, Keen, Dennis, 
Grubb, Redman ; commissioned officers, 16 ; staff, 2 ; non-commissioned 
and privates, 89. (Captain McLean's company not mustered.) 

At Large. — Colonel, William Grayson ; Captains, Mitchell, Smith, 
Triplett, Jones, Moore, McGuire, Smallwood, Willis, (late) Grant ; commis- 
sioned officers, 17 ; staff, 3 ; non-commissioned and privates, 189. 


First Regiment. — Colonel, Thomas Marshall ; Captains, Wolcut, Soper, 
Warner, Marshall, Smith, Thomas, King, Wales ; commissioned officers, 25 ; 
staff, 5 ; non-commissioned and privates, 277. 

20 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

Second Regiment. — Colonel, G. Bradford ; Captains, Wadsworth, Cooper, 
Warner, Marshall, Smith, Thomas, King, Wales ; commissioned officers, 22 ; 
staff, 5 ; non-commissioned and privates, 311. 

Third Regiment. — Colonel, Benjamin Tupper ; Captains, Thorne, May- 
bury, Farnum, White, Wheelwright, Page, Porter, Greenleaf ; commissioned 
officers, 30 ; staff, 5 ; non-commissioned and privates, 342. 

Fourth Regiment. — Colonel, Samuel Brewer ; Captains, Watkins, Bur- 
bank, Jenkins, Merrel, Stones, Chadwick, Donnel, Brewer ; commissioned 
officers, 29 ; staff, 5 ; non-commissioned and privates, 313. 

Fifth Regiment. — Colonel, James Wesson ; Captains, Pettengill, Child, 
Bartlet, Blanchard, Cogswell, Ward, Dix ; commissioned officers, 22 ; staff, 
5 ; non-commissioned and privates, 336. 

Sixth Regiment. — Colonel, John Bailey ; Captains, Darby, Maxwell, 
Drew, Alden, Dunham, Burr, Allen, Warren ; commissioned officers, 24 ; 
staff, 5 ; non-commissioned and privates, 384. 

Seventh Regiment. — Colonel, Michael Jackson ; Captains, Keith, 
Burnam, Brown, Varnum, Wiley, Cleveland, Eb. Cleveland, Bancroft ; 
commissioned officers, 25 ; staff, 4; non-commissioned and privates, 315. 

His Excellency's Body-Guard. — Captain, Gibbs ; commissioned officers, 
4 ; staff, 1 ; non-commissioned and privates, 148. 


Colonel, Stephen Moylan ; Captains, Moore, Plunket, Hopkins, Heard, 
Pike, Gray ; commissioned officers, 15 ; staff, 5 ; non-commissioned and 
privates, 187. 

Colonel, Theo. Bland ; Captains, Jones, Belfield, Call, Harrison, Dan- 
dridge ; commissioned officers, 15 ; staff, 5 ; non-commissioned and 
privates, 165. 

Colonel, George Blaylor ; Captains, Lewis, Jones, Smith, Cad. Jones ; 
commissioned officers, 15 ; staff, 6 ; non-commissioned and privates, 129. 


Colonel, Ch. Harrison ; Captains, Brown, , , Dandridge, 

Singleton, Carter, Pendleton, Henry, Baylop, Eddens ; commissioned 
officers, 42 ; staff, 5 ; non-commissioned and privates, 432. 

Colonel, John Crane ; Captains, Burbeck, Eustice, Wills, Trothengha, 
Sergeant, Treadwell, Seward ; commissioned officers, 36 ; staff, 2 ; non- 
commissioned and privates, 295., 

Colonel, John Lamb ; Captains, Lee, Jnoa. Gibb, Clark, Randall, 
Porter, Doughty, Bauman, Mansfield ; commissioned officers, 34 ; staff, — ; 
non-commissioned and privates, 203. 

The Revolution 21 


New Hampshire, total officers and men, 1,3*5 

Massachusetts " " " " 2,642 

Rhode Island " " " " 500 

Connecticut " " " " 2,352 

Total in New England regiments, . 


New York, total 

officers and men, 


New Jersey " 


Pennsylvania ' ' 

" " " 


Delaware ' ' 

c« « »» 


Maryland " 


Virginia ' ' 

X it t* 


North Carolina " 

l all State regiments, 


Total ir 




Light Dragoons, 


At Large, 


Grand total 25,029 

We can gain considerable knowledge of the American Army in 1778 and 
1779 from the reports of Baron Steuben, its Inspector-General, some of 
which, printed in Kapp's Life of Steuben, can be profitably repeated at this 
time : 

The effective strength of the army was divided into divisions, com- 
manded by major-generals ; into brigades, commanded by brigadier-gen- 
erals ; and into regiments, commanded by colonels. The number of men 
in a regiment was fixed by Congress, as well as in a company — so many 
infantry, cavalry, and artillery. But the eternal ebb and flow of men en- 
gaged for three, six, and nine months, who went and came every day, ren- 
dered it impossible to have either a regiment or a company complete ; and 
the words company, regiment, brigade, and division were so vague that they 
did not convey any idea upon which to form a calculation, either of a par- 
ticular corps or of the army in general. They were so unequal in their 
number, that it would have been impossible to execute any manceuvers. 
Sometimes a regiment was stronger than a brigade. I have seen a regiment 
consisting of thirty men, and a company of one corporal ! Nothing was so 
difficult, and often so impossible, as to get a correct list of the State or a re- 
turn of any company, regiment, or corps. . . . General Knox assured 
me that, previous to the establishment of my department, there never was a 
campaign in which the military magazines did not furnish from five thou- 
sand to eight thousand muskets to replace those which were lost in the way 
I have described above. The loss of bayonets was still greater. The 
American soldier, never having used this arm, had no faith in it, and never 
used it but to roast his beefsteak, and indeed, often left it at home. This is 
not astonishing when it is considered that a majority of the States engaged 
their soldiers for from six to nine months. Each man who went away took 

22 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

his musket with him, and his successor received another from the public 
store. No captain kept a book. Accounts were never furnished nor re- 
quired. As our army is, thank God, little subject to desertion, I venture to 
say that during an entire campaign there have not been twenty muskets lost 
since my system came into force. It was the same with the pouches and other 
accoutrements, and I do not believe that I exaggerate when I state that my 
arrangements have saved the United States at least eight hundred thousand 
French livres a year. 

The arms at Valley Forge were in a horrible condition, covered with 
rust, half of them without bayonets, many from which a single shot could 
not be fired. The pouches were quite as bad as the arms. A great many 
of the men had tin boxes instead of pouches, others had cow-horns ; and 
muskets, carbines, fowling-pieces, and rifles were to be seen in the same 

The description of the dress is most easily given. The men were liter- 
ally naked, some of them in the fullest extent of the word. The officers who 
had coats, had them of every color and make. I saw officers, at a grand 
parade at Valley Forge, mounting guard in a sort of dressing gown, made 
of an old blanket or woollen bed-cover. With regard to their military dis- 
cipline, I may safely say no such thing existed. In the first place there was 
no regular formation. A so-called regiment was formed of three platoons, 
another of five, eight, nine, and the Canadian regiment of twenty-one. The 
formation of the regiments was as varied as their mode of drill, which only 
consisted of the manual exercise. Each colonel had a system of his own, 
the one according to the English, the other according to the Prussian or 
French style. There was only one thing in which they were uniform, and 
that was the way of marching in the manceuvers and on the line of march. 
They all adopted the mode of marching in files used by the Indians. 

I have not been able to find any correct statement of the strength of the 
southern army 10 ; but without doing injustice to the South, we may reason- 
ably suppose that matters stood much worse there than in the North, because 
the South was more divided in itself, and less enthusiastic for the cause of 
Independence. On the other hand, we find, in the Steuben Papers, the 
strength of the principal army exactly stated. 

General Washington's army, at the beginning of the campaign of 1779, 
consisted of six divisions, of two brigades each, numbering in all 11,067 
men — forty-six regiments. These regiments had from one hundred and 
fifty (Seventh Virginia) to four hundred and thirty (Sixth Connecticut) 
rank and file. Steuben selected from each regiment, in proportion to its 
strength, a number of picked men, to form eight light-infantry companies, 
and then, where they were too weak, united the regiments into one battalion. 
Thus, the whole army consisted of thirty-five battalions (9,755 men), making 
two hundred and seventy-eight the average strength of each battalion, and 
the eight companies of light infantry before mentioned in addition. Each 
of the latter had one field officer, four captains, eight subalterns, twelve 
sergeants, and 164 rank and file. The divisions were severally known as 
the Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and 
North Carolina. 

The Revolution 23 

CAMPAIGN [1779]- 


First Brigade, Woolford [Woodford?] — 2d Regiment, 175; 5th and 
nth, 223 ; 8th, 182 ; 7th, 150 ; 3d and 4th, 245. Total, 975. 

Second Brigade, Muhlenberg. — 6th, 168 ; 2d State, 230 ; Gist's, 153 ; 
1st State, 209 ; 1st and 10th, 270. Total, 1030. 


First Brigade, Smallwood. — 1st, 260 ; 5th, 220 ; 7th, 230 ; 3d, 270. 
Total, 980. 

Second Brigade, Guest [M. Gist]. — 2d, 280; 6th, 230; 4th, 320; 
Delaware, 220. Total, 1050. 


First Brigade, Irvine. — 1st, 210 ; 7th, 170 ; 10th, 240 ; 2d, 340. Total, 

Second Brigade, Johnson. — 3d, 260; 6th, 180; 9th, 180; 5th, 240. 
Total, 860. 


First Brigade, Huntington. — 4th, 184; 8th, 232 ; 6th, 430 ; 3d, $67;* 
Total, 1 2 13. 

Second Brigade, Parsons. — 1st, 289 ; 5th, 220 ; 2d, 206 ; 7th, 295. Total,. 


First Brigade, Nixon. — 2d, 224 ; 5th, 263 ; 4th, 313. Total, 800. 
Second Brigade, Learned. — 1st, 277 ; 7th, 212 ; 8th, 248. Total, 737. 
Pettason's [Paterson's] Brigade. — 9th, 192 ; 12th, 184 ; 10th, 179 ; 15th, 
260. Total, 815. 


1st, 328 ; 2d, 298. Total, 626. 

Return of the number of men enlisted during the war, and for shorter 
periods in the army under the immediate command of His Excellency 
General Washington, December, 1779 : 

1st Maryland Brigade 1416 

*d " " 1497 

1st Pennsylvania 12s * 

2d " " ,050 

New Jersey " 1297 

New York " 1267 

1st Connecticut " 1680 

*d , " " 1367 

Hand's " IO S3 

Stark's " 12 10 

Total, 13,070 

24 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

It would appear from the figures given in the preceding pages that the 
New England element in the American Army, subsequent to the withdrawal 
of the British from New England territory, was under forty per cent, of the 
whole native force, or but little more than proportionate to its relative pop- 
ulation. In like manner, it appears that the leaders of the army were no 
less representative of its true constitution than the rank and file. Of Wash- 
ington's twelve generals at the beginning of the war, Nathan ael Greene, 
William Heath, Seth Pomeroy, Israel Putnam, Joseph Spencer, John Sulli- 
van, John Thomas, Artemas Ward, and David Wooster were New Eng- 
land men — Charles Lee of Virginia, and Richard Montgomery and Philip 
Schuyler of New York completing the staff. But the majority of the New 
Englanders dropped out of sight before the conflict was fairly begun ; 
and besides Greene, the only general officers from that section who 
achieved renown during the progress of the war were the Scotch-Irishmen, 
Henry Knox and John Stark, and the Irishman, John Sullivan. The New 
England general in command of the forces on Long Island seems to have 
been relegated mainly to garrison duty after the retreat from that place, and 
Benjamin Lincoln's campaign in the South resulted most disastrously. 
When the army was discharged in 1783, we find that among the fifteen 
major-generals, New England was represented by five — Greene, Heath, 
Putnam, Lincoln, and Knox. Of the remainder, there were, of Scottish 
descent, besides Knox : William Alexander (N. J.), Alexander McDougall 
(N. Y.), Arthur St. Clair (Pa.) ; of English descent, in addition to the four 
first named : Horatio Gates (Va.), Robert Howe (N. C), William Small- 
wood (Md.), and William Moultrie (?) (S. C); of French birth: Lafayette and 
Du Portail ; and of German: Steuben. Of the twenty-two brigadiers at that 
time — six from New England — there were of Scottish blood : William Irvine 
(Pa.), Lachlan Mcintosh (Ga.), John Paterson (Mass.), Charles Scott (Va.), 
John Stark (N. H.); of Anglo-Scottish: George Clinton (N. Y.), James 
Clinton (N. Y.), Edward Hand (Pa.), Anthony Wayne (Pa.); of French : 
Isaac Huger (S. C); of German : Johann De Kalb (France), Peter Muh- 
lenberg (Va.); of Welsh: Daniel Morgan (Va.), O. H. Williams (Md.); 
and of English : Elias Dayton (N. J.), Mordecai Gist (Md.), John Greaton 
(Mass.), Moses Hazen (Mass.), Jedediah Huntington (Conn.), Rufus Put- 
nam (Mass.), Jethro Sumner (?) (S. C), George Weedon (Va.). Out of the 
thirty-seven names on these two lists of 1783, eleven were from New Eng- 
land ; and of the total list about one half were of English descent, while 
two fifths were to a large degree Celtic in their descent. 

Proceeding to analyze the list of the other generals created during the 
Revolutionary period, we further find as of probable Scottish blood : John 
Armstrong (Pa.), Francis Barber (N. J.), William Campbell (Va.), George 
Rogers Clark " (Va.), William Davidson (N. C), John Douglas (Conn.), 
James Ewing (Pa.), Robert Lawson (Va.), Andrew Lewis (Va.), William 
Maxwell (N. J.), Hugh Mercer (Va.), James Moore (N. C), John Nixon 

The Revolution 25 

(Pa.), Andrew Pickens (S. C), James Potter (Pa.), Joseph Reed (Pa.), 
Griffith Rutherford (N. C), John Morin Scott (N. Y.), Adam Stephen 
(Va.), Thomas Sumter (?) (Va.), William Thompson (Pa)., a total of twenty- 
one ; of Welsh blood : John Cadwallader (Pa.), William Davies (Va.), James 
Varnum (Mass.); of French : P. H. De Barre (France), Philip De Coudray 
(France), A. R. De Fermoy (France), John P. De Haas (Pa., Holland- 
French), Francis Marion (S. C); of Dutch: Nicholas Herkimer (N. Y.), 
Abraham Ten Broeck (N. Y.), Philip Van Cortlandt (N. Y.), Gosen Van 
Schaick (N. Y.); of German : Frederic W. de Woedtke ; of Irish : Thomas 
Conway (Ireland), James Hogan (N. C.), Stephen Moylan (Pa.); of Polish : 
Casimir Pulaski (Poland); and of probable English descent: Benedict 
Arnold (Conn.), William Blount (N. C), Philemon Dickinson (N. J.), 
Samuel Elbert (Ga.), John Fellows (Mass.), Joseph Frye (Mass.), John 
Frost (Maine), Christopher Gadsden (S. C), John Glover (Mass.), John 
Lacey (Pa.), Ebenezer Learned (Mass.), Thomas Mifflin (Pa.), Francis 
Nash (?) (Va.), William North (Maine), Samuel Parsons (Conn.), Enoch 
Poor (N. H.), James Reed (N. H.), Gold S. Silliman (Conn.), Edward 
Stevens (Va.), James Wadsworth (Conn.), Joseph Warren (Mass.), John 
Whitcomb (Mass.), James Wilkinson (Md.), William Woodford (Va.), 
Nathaniel Woodhull (N. Y.), a total of twenty-five ; making with the other 
names mentioned in this paragraph a list of sixty-three names in all, less 
than half of which are English, and about one fourth from New England. 

Taking all the lists together, we have an aggregate of one hundred and 
nine names, which include practically all of Washington's generals ; and it 
appears that but thirty-one of them came from the New England States, and 
that less than half were of English descent — about sixty being non-English. 

An examination of the lists of colonels, captains, lieutenants, and minor 
commissioned officers will show a like distribution. The names of 2310 of 
those who were in the Continental service are printed in the American State 
Papers, vol. iii., Military Affairs, pp. 529 to 559, under the heading, " Sched- 
ule of the names and rank of most of the officers of the War of Indepen- 
dence, chiefly returned as belonging to the lines or corps of the thirteen 
original United States soon after said army was disbanded in 1783, arranged 
alphabetically and numbered distinctly according to the States." 

This schedule is prefaced by the following communication to Congress 
from the Secretary of War : 


Communicated to the House of Representatives, January 10, 1827. 

Department of War, January 10, 1827. 
Sir : 

In compliance with the resolution of the House of Representatives 
of the 8th instant, directing the Secretary of War " to report to their House 

26 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

the name and rank of each officer of the Continental army who served to 
the end of the Revolutionary War, and who were by the resolution of Con- 
gress entitled to half-pay during life ; and also, as nearly as practicable, the 
names of the remaining officers and their places of residence," I transmit 
herewith a list of the names and rank of the officers of the Revolutionary 
War, as complete as the records of the Department will furnish, with the 
exception of foreign officers. There is no evidence in the Department to 
show which of them " were by the resolution of Congress entitled to half- 
pay during life," nor is it known which of them are still living, with their 
places of residence, except those who are on the pension list. 
Very respectfully, etc., 

James Barbour, Secretary of War. 
To the Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

The list of names sent with this report shows the State to which each 
officer is credited, and the regiment to which he belonged. In the final 
years of the war, with very few exceptions, the officers commanded troops 
raised by their own States. Of these 2310 officers, 79 were from New 
Hampshire, 445 from Massachusetts, 44 from Rhode Island, 254 from Con- 
necticut, 200 from New York, 92 from New Jersey, 421 from Pennsylvania, 
32 from Delaware, 166 from Maryland, 337 from Virginia, 99 from North 
Carolina, 93 from South Carolina, and 48 from Georgia. Less than forty per 
cent, of these were from New England. 

It will be seen from the heading of the list that these officers principally 
belonged to the Continental Army. Militia officers are not, as a rule, men- 
tioned, unless they also served in the Continental or State lines. As the 
most of the troops of the Southern States did not belong to the Conti- 
nental establishment, but were simply State militiamen, their officers would 
have no place in this list. 


1 As early as 1763-64 we find them mentioned by the name " Scotch-Irish " in the Legis- 
lature of the Province of Pennsylvania, when one Nathaniel Grubb, a member of the 
Assembly from Chester County so denominated the Paxtang settlers. These people had 
petitioned the Quaker government in vain for protection from the murderous attacks of the 
savages ; and finally, despairing of help from that source, some of them took the law into 
their own hands and made an indiscriminate slaughter of such Indians as they could find 
in their neighborhood. In denouncing this action to his fellow Quakers, Grubb referred to 
these settlers as " a pack of insignificant Scotch-Irish, who, if they were all killed, could well 
enough be spared." (See, William H. Egle, History of Dauphin County, Penna.,p. 60.) 

Rev. John Elder, also, in a letter written from Paxtang, under date of February 7, 
1764, to Col. Edward Shippen, of Lancaster, relative to the killing of the Conestoga 
Indians in December, 1763, says : " The Presbyterians, who are the most numerous I 
imagine of any Denomination in the Province, are enraged at their being charged in bulk 
with these facts, under the name of Scotch-Irish, and other ill-natured titles, and that the 
killing of the Conestegoe Indians is compared to the Irish massacres and reckoned the most 
barbarous of either, so that things are grown to that pitch now that the country seems 
determined that no Indian Treaties shall be held, or savages maintained at the expense of 
the Province, unless his Majestie's pleasure on these heads is well known ; for I understand, 

The Revolution 27 

to my great Satisfaction that amidst our great confusions there are none even of the most 
warm and furious tempers, but what are firmly attached to his Majesty, and would cheer- 
fully risk their lives to promote his service." 

Edmund Burke, writing in 1757, says : "The number of white people in Virginia is 
between sixty and seventy thousand ; and they are growing every day more numerous, by the 
migration of the Irish, who, not succeeding so well in Pennsylvania as the more frugal and 
industrious Germans, sell their lands in that province to the latter, and take up new ground 
in the remote countries in Virginia, Maryland, and North Carolina. These are chiefly 
Presbyterians from the Northern part of Ireland, who in America are generally called 
Scotch-Irish." — European Settlements in America, vol. ii., p. 216. 

8 Although they came to this land from Ireland, where their ancestors had a century 
before planted themselves, yet they retained unmixed the national Scotch character. 
Nothing sooner offended them than to be called Irish. Their antipathy to this appellation 
had its origin in the hostility existing in Ireland between the Celtic race, the native Irish, 
and the English and Scotch colonists. Mr. Belknap quotes from a letter of Rev. James 
MacGregor to Governor Shute, in which he says: "We are surprised to hear ourselves 
termed Irish people, when we so frequently ventured our all for the British crown and 
liberties against the Irish Papists and gave all tests of our loyalty which the government of 
Ireland required, and are always ready to do the same when required." — Parker's History 
of Londonderry, New Hampshire, p. 68. 

3 As against the more or less willing adoption of the name "Scotch-Irish" in the 
middle of the last century we may contrast the following citations, gathered by Mr. Thomas 
Hamilton Murray, a more recent emigrant from Ireland, who argues that a man born in a 
stable must be a horse. Mr. Murray says : 

"The colonial records repeatedly mention the 'Irish,' not the Scotch-Irish. Cotton 
Mather, in a sermon in 1700, says : ' At length it was proposed that a colony of Irish might 
be sent over to check the growth of this country.' . . . The party of immigrants remaining 
at Falmouth, Me., over winter, and which later settled in Londonderry, N. H., were alluded 
to in the records of the general court as ' poor Irish.' 

" On St. Patrick's day, the Irish of Portsmouth, N. H., instituted St. Patrick's Lodge 
of Masons. Later we find Stark's Rangers at Fort Edward requesting an extra supply of 
grog so as to properly observe the anniversary of St. Patrick. 

" Marmion's Maritime Ports of Ireland states that ' Irish families ' settled Londonderry, 
N. H. Spencer declares that ' the manufacture of linen was considerably increased by the 
coming of Irish immigrants.' In 1723, says Condon ' a colony of Irish settled in Maine.' 
Moore, in his sketch of Concord, N. H., pays tribute to the ' Irish settlers' in that section 
of New England. McGee speaks of * the Irish settlement of Belfast,' Me. The same 
author likewise declares that ' Irish families also settled at Palmer and Worcester, Mass.' 
Cullen describes the arrival at Boston in 1717 of Capt. Robert Temple, 'with a number of 
Irish Protestants.' Capt. Temple was, in 1740, elected to the Charitable Irish Society. 
In another place Cullen alludes to ' the Irish spinners and weavers, who landed in Boston 
in the earlier part of the 18th century.' . . . 

"Among those who have been wrongly claimed [as Scotch-Irish] are Carroll, Sullivan, 
. . . Moylan, Wayne, Barry, . . and . . . of a later period, . . . Meade and 
Sheridan. . . . 

" Of the Revolutionary heroes mentioned above, Charles Carroll was of old Irish stock. 
His cousin, John Carroll, was a Roman Catholic clergyman, a Jesuit, a patriot, a bishop, 
and archbishop. Daniel Carroll was another sterling patriot. 

"The Sullivans, James and John, were also of ancient Irish stock, the name having 
been O'Sullivan even in their father's time. 

" Gen. Knox and his father were both members of the Charitable Irish Society, of 
Boston. The General also belonged to the Friendly Sons of St. Patrick, Philadelphia. 

28 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

' ' Moylan was a brother of the Roman Catholic bishop of Cork. . . . 

" Wayne was of Irish [English] descent and proud of his Irish lineage. He was an 
active member of the Friendly Sons of St. Patrick. 

" Barry was an Irish Roman Catholic." 

(T. H. Murray, in Appendix to Samuel Swett Green's monograph on The Scotch- 
Irish in America, read before the American Antiquarian Society in Boston, April 24, 1895.) 

4 The members of this organization were as follows : Isaac All, John Barclay, Thomas 
Barclay, William Barclay, Commodore John Barry, Thomas Batt, Colonel Ephraim Blaine, 
John Bleakly, William Bourke, Dr. Robert Boyd, Hugh Boyle, John Boyle, John Brown, 
William Brown, General Richard Butler, Andrew Caldwell, David Caldwell, James Cald- 
well, John Caldwell, Samuel Caldwell, William Caldwell, George Campbell, James 
Campbell, Samuel Carson, Daniel Clark, Dr. John Cochran, James Collins, John Connor, 
William Constable, D. H. Conyngham, James Crawford, George Davis, Sharp Delany, John 
Donnaldson, John Dunlap, William Erskine, Thomas Fitzsimmons, Tench Francis, Turbutt 
Francis, Benjamin Fuller, George Fullerton, Archibald Gamble, Robert Glen, Robert 
Gray, John Greene, General Edward Hand, William Hamilton, James Hawthorn, Charles 
Heatly, George Henry, Alexander Holmes, Hugh Holmes, George Hughes, Genl. William 
Irvine, Francis Johnston, Genl. Henry Knox, George Latimer, Thomas Lea, John Leamy, 
James Logan, Ulysses Lynch, Blair M'Clenachan, George Meade, James Mease, John 
Mease, Matthew Mease, John Mitchell, John Mitchell, Jr., Randle Mitchell, William Mit- 
chell, Hugh Moore, Major James Moore, Patrick Moore, Col. Thomas Moore, James 
Moylan, Jasper Moylan, John Moylan, Genl. Stephen Moylan, John Murray, John M. 
Nesbitt, Alexander Nesbitt, Francis Nichols, John Nixon, Michael Morgan O'Brien, John 
Patton, Capt. John Patterson, Oliver Pollock, Robert Rainy, Thomas Read, Genl. Thomas 
Robinson, John Shee, Hugh Shiell, Charles Stewart, Walter Stewart, William Thompson, 
George Washington (an adopted member), Genl. Anthony Wayne, Francis West, Jr., John 
West, William West, William West, Jr., John White, Joseph Wilson. The Moylans, Barry, 
Fitzsimmons, Leamy, and Meade, all brave and active patriots, are said to have been 
Catholic Irish, and probably also were Bourke, Connor, Lynch, O'Brien, and Shee. The 
others, with very few exceptions, were Scotch-Irish. When Robert Morris organized the 
Bank of Pennsylvania in 1780 for the purpose of furnishing funds to keep the army in food, 
more than one third of its ,£300,000 capital was subscribed for and paid in by twenty-seven 
members of this Society. The society is still in existence. 

5 Two notable exceptions were those of the settlement of Luzerne County (Wyo- 
ming), Penna., by 117 colonists from Connecticut in 1762-63 and by 196 in 1769; and 
the settlement at Marietta, Ohio, of the Massachusetts colonists in 1788. Small col- 
onies were also planted in Maryland, South Carolina, and Georgia by settlers from New 

6 More than sixty years ago Dr. Charles Hodge found occasion to rebuke an indiscreet 
exhibition of this same spirit in connection with the early church history of the country. His 
remarks, at that time so pertinent to the point in question, have ever since been so generally 
applicable to the majority of New England attempts at American history that they cannot 
be said to have lost any of their force since 1839. He says {Constitutional History of the 
Presbyterian Church, vol. i., pp. 60, 61) : 

•• Nothing but a sectional vanity little less than insane, could lead to the assertion that 
Congregationalism was the basis of Presbyterianism in this country, and that the Presbyterian 
Church never would have had an existence, except in name, had not the Congregationalists 
come among us from New England. The number of Puritans who settled in New England 
was about twenty-one thousand. If it be admitted that three-fourths of these were Congre- 
gationalists, (which is a large admission,) it gives between fifteen and sixteen thousand. 
The Presbyterian emigrants who came to this country by the middle of the last century, 
were between one and two hundred thousand. Those from Ireland alone, imperfect as 

The Revolution 29 

are the records of emigration, could not have been less than fifty thousand, and probably 
were far more numerous. . . . 

"It is to be remembered that the emigration of New England men westward did 
not take place, to any great extent, until after the Revolutionary War ; that is, until nearly 
three-fourths of a century after the Presbyterian Church was founded and widely extended. 
At that time western New York, Ohio, and the still more remote west was a wilderness. 
Leaving that region out of view, what would be even now the influence of New England 
men in the Presbyterian Church ? Yet it is very common to hear those who formed a mere 
handful of the original materials of the Church, speaking of all others as foreigners and 
intruders. Such representations would be offensive from their injustice, were it not for their 
absurdity. Suppose the few (and they were comparatively very few) Congregationalists 
of East Jersey had refused to associate with their Dutch and Scotch Presbyterian neighbours, 
what great difference would it have made ? Must the thousands of Presbyterians already in 
the country, and the still more numerous thousands annually arriving, have ceased to exist ? 
Are those few Congregationalists the fathers of us all ? The truth is, it was not until a 
much later period that the great influx of Congregationalists into our Church took place, 
though they are now disposed to regard the descendants of its founders as holding their 
places in the Church of their fathers only by sufferance." 

7 The falsity of these tables was first clearly pointed out by Mr. Justin Winsor, in an 
address delivered before the Historical Society of Massachusetts, in January, 1886. See 
Proceedings of that Society, Second Series, vol. ii., pp. 204-207. 

8 The backwoodsmen were engaged in a threefold contest. In the first place, they were 
occasionally, but not often, opposed to the hired British and German soldiers of a foreign 
king. Next, they were engaged in a fierce civil war with the Tories of their own number. 
Finally, they were pitted against the Indians, in the ceaseless border struggle of a rude, 
vigorous civilization to overcome an inevitably hostile savagery. The regular British armies, 
marching to and fro in the course of their long campaigns on the seaboard, rarely went far 
enough back to threaten the frontiersmen ; the latter had to do chiefly with Tories led by 
British chiefs, and with Indians instigated by British agents. — Roosevelt, Winning of the 

West, vol. i., p. 276. 

Dr. Thomas Smythe gives a careful statement of the activity of Presbyterian elders in 
the War of Independence in the province of South Carolina : "The battles of the 'Cow- 
pens,' of ' King's Mountain,' and also the severe skirmish known as ' Huck's Defeat,' 
are among the most celebrated in this State as giving a turning-point to the contests of the 
Revolution. General Morgan, who commanded at the Cowpens, was a Presbyterian 
elder. . . . General Pickens . . . was also a Presbyterian elder, and nearly 
all under their command were Presbyterians. In the battle of King's Mountain, Colonel 
Campbell, Colonel James Williams (who fell in action), Colonel Cleaveland, Colonel Shelby, 
and Colonel Sevier were all Presbyterian elders ; and the body of their troops were col- 
lected from Presbyterian settlements. At Huck's Defeat, in York, Colonel Bratton and Major 
Dickson were both elders in the Presbyterian Church. Major Samuel Morrow, who was with 
Colonel Sumter in four engagements, and at King's Mountain, Blackstock, and other battles, 
and whose home was in the army till the termination of hostilities, was for about fifty years 
a ruling elder in the Presbyterian Church. It may also be mentioned in this connection 
that Marion, Huger, and other distinguished men of Revolutionary memory were of 
Huguenot . . . descent." — Thomas Smythe, Presbyterianism, the Revolution, the Declara- 
tion, and the Constitution, pp. 32 sea. 

9 Examination of Richard Penn before Parliament, November 1, 1775 : 
" Q. What force has the Province of Pennsylvania received? A. When I left Pennsyl- 
vania they had 20,000 men in arms, imbodied but not in pay ; and 4500 men since raised. 
Q. What were these 20,000 ; militia, or what? A. They were volunteers throughout the 
Province. Q. What were the 4500 ? A. They were Minute-men, when upon service in pay." 

30 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

10 Greene's army at the battle of Guilford Court-House (N. C.), March 15, 1781, con- 
sisted of 4243 foot and 201 cavalry. It was composed of Huger's brigade of Virginia Con- 
tinentals, 778 ; Williams's Maryland brigade and a company from Delaware, 630 ; infantry 
of Lee's partisan legion, 82 ; total of Continentals, 1490. There were also 1060 North 
Carolina militia, under Brigadier-Generals Butler and Eaton ; 1693 militia from Augusta 
and Rockbridge counties, Virginia, under Generals Stevens and Lawson ; in all, 2753. 
Washington's light dragoons, 86 ; Lee's dragoons, 75 ; Marquis de Bretagne's horse, 40 ; 
total, 201. 

11 Mr. Reuben G. Thwaites, of the State Historical Society of Wisconsin, writes to the 
author of this paper as follows: "According to all family traditions, John Clark, great- 
grandfather of George Rogers Clark, came to Virginia, in 1630, from the southwest part of 
Scotland. According to one tradition, a few years later, he visited friends in Maryland, 
and married there ' a red-haired Scotch woman.' George Rogers Clark himself had ' sandy ' 
hair ; another tradition has it that the woman was a Dane. Their one son, William-John, 
died early, leaving two sons, John (2) and Jonathan. Jonathan was a bachelor, and left his 
estate to his brother's son, John (3). One of William-John's daughters married a Scotch 
settler, McCloud, and their daughter married John Rogers, the father of the Ann Rogers 
who married John Clark (4), her cousin, and thus she became the mother of George Rogers 
Clark. So George Rogers Clark had Scotch ancestry on both sides of the house." — Samuel 
Swett Green, The Scotch-Irish in America. 



LET us now examine the composition of the Continental Congress of 
1776, the fifty-six members of which were the signers of the Declara- 
tion. So far as can at this time be ascertained, that body consisted of 
thirty-four of English descent, as follows : John Adams (Mass.), Samuel 
Adams (Mass.), Josiah Bartlett (N. H.), Carter Braxton (Va.), Samuel 
Chase (Md.), George Clymer (Pa.), William Ellery (R. I.), Benjamin 
Franklin (Pa.), Elbridge Gerry (Mass.), Lyman Hall (Ga.), John Hancock 
(Mass.), Benjamin Harrison (Va.), Thomas Heyward, Jr. (S. C), Joseph 
Hewes (N. C), Stephen Hopkins (R. I.), Francis Hopkinson (N. J.), 
Samuel Huntington (Conn.), F. L. Lee (Va.), R. H. Lee (Va.), Arthur 
Middleton (S. C), Robert Morris (Pa.), Lewis Morris (N. Y.), William 
Paca (Md.), Robert Treat Paine (Mass.), John Penn (N. C), Caesar Rod- 
ney (Del.), Benjamin Rush (Pa.), Roger Sherman (Conn.), Richard Stock- 
ton (?) (N. J.), Thomas Stone (Md.), George Walton (Ga.), William Whipple 
(N. H.), Oliver Wolcott (Conn.), George Wythe (Va.) ; eleven of Scottish: 
William Hooper (N. C), Philip Livingston (N. Y.), Thomas McKean (Pa.), 
Thomas Nelson, Jr. (Va.), George Ross (Del.), Edward Rutledge (S. C), 
James Smith (Pa.), George Taylor (Pa.), Matthew Thornton (N. H.), James 
Wilson (Pa.), John Witherspoon (N. J.) ; five of Welsh : William Floyd 
(N. Y.), Button Gwinnett (?) (Ga.), Thomas Jefferson (Va.), Francis Lewis 
(N. Y.), William Williams (Conn.) ; one of Swedish : John Morton (Pa.); 
two of Irish: Charles Carroll (Md.), Thomas Lynch, Jr. (S. C). The father 
of George Read (Del.) was born in Ireland and his mother in Wales ; 
Abraham Clark, of Elizabethtown, and John Hart, of Hunterdon County, 
both from strong Scottish settlements in New Jersey, are difficult to place. 

On the whole, the Continental Congress of 1776 was a fairly representa- 
tive body, being two thirds English and one third non-English ; although it 
may be observed that the Dutch of New York, the Germans of Pennsyl- 
vania, and the Huguenots of the South are not represented by members of 
their own races. The first two classes, however, were generally, and to a con- 
siderable degree erroneously, regarded as unfavorable to the American cause. 

A similar examination of the membership of the Constitutional conven- 
tion, which completed its labors at Philadelphia, September 17, 1787, shows 
a like mixed composition to that of the Continental Congress. 

Of the fifty-four members representing the colonies in that body, we 
find that, besides Washington, probably twenty-nine of them were English, 
as follows : Abraham Baldwin (Ga.), Richard Bassett (Del.), Gunning 
Bedford, Jr. (Del.), William Blount (N. C), David Brearly (N. J.), George 


32 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

Clymer (Pa.), William R. Davie (N. C), Jonathan Dayton (N. J.), John 
Dickinson (Del.), Oliver Ellsworth (Conn.), William Few (Ga.), Benjamin 
Franklin (Pa.), Elbridge Gerry (Mass.), Nicholas Gilman (N. H.), Nathaniel 
Gorham (Mass.), Jared Ingersoll (Pa.), William Johnson (Conn.), Rufus 
King (Mass.), John Langdon (N. H.), George Mason (Va.), Thomas 
Mifflin (Pa.), Gouverneur Morris (Pa.), Robert Morris (Pa.), William Pierce 
(Ga.), Charles Pinckney (S. C), Charles C. Pinckney (S. C), Roger Sher- 
man (Conn.), Caleb Strong (Mass.), George Wythe (Va.) ; twelve were 
Scottish : John Blair (Va.), Alexander Hamilton (N. Y.), W. Churchill 
Houston (N. J.), William Livingston (N. J.), James McClurg (Va.), James 
McHenry (Md.), John Mercer (Md.), William Paterson (N. J.), John Rut- 
ledge (S. C), Richard Dobbs Spaight (?)( N. C), James Wilson (Pa.), Hugh 
Williamson (N. C.) ; three were Irish : Pierce Butler (S. C), Daniel Car- 
roll (Md.), Thomas Fitzsimmons (Pa.) ; two French : Daniel Jenifer (?) 
(Md.), Henry Laurens (S. C.) ; one German : Jacob Broom (?) (Del.) ; 
George Read (Del.) was Welsh-English ; James Madison's ancestry was 
mixed — English, Welsh, and Scottish, and that of Edmund Randolph 
(Va.) English and Scottish ; John Lansing (N. Y.) and Robert Yates 
(N. Y.) were Dutch, and the descent of Luther Martin (Md.) is uncertain. 

When the independent State governments were formed after the adoption 
of the Declaration of Independence, and their governors chosen, then, in 
the words of the ablest and most recent historian of the Puritans, 1 " the 
Scotch-Irish gave to New York her first governor, George Clinton. . . . To 
Delaware they gave her first governor, John MacKinley. To Pennsylvania 
they gave her war governor, Thomas McKean, one of the signers of the 
Declaration of Independence. To New Jersey Scotland gave her war 
governor, William Livingston, and to Virginia, Patrick Henry, not only her 
great war governor but the civil leader who, supported by his Scotch-Irish 
brethren from the western counties, first carried and then held Virginia for 
the cause of Independence. To North Carolina the Scotch-Irish gave her 
first governor, Richard Caswell, and to South Carolina they gave another 
signer of the Declaration, Edward Rutledge, and another great war gov- 
ernor in the person of John Rutledge. . . . What those men did for the 
cause of American Independence is known to every student, but their un- 
English origin is not so generally recognized. In the colonial wars their 
section furnished most of the soldiers of Virginia. 

" It is a noteworthy fact in American history, that of the four members 
of Washington's Cabinet, Knox, of Massachusetts, the only New Englander 
was a Scotch-Irishman ; Alexander Hamilton, of New York, was a Scotch- 
Frenchman ; Thomas Jefferson was of Welsh descent, and the fourth, Ed- 
mund Randolph, claimed among his ancestors the Scotch Earls of Murray. 
New York also furnished the first chief justice of the United States, John 
Jay, who was a descendant of French Huguenots ; while the second chief 
justice, John Rutledge," was Scotch-Irish, as were also Wilson and Iredell, 



The Constitution 33 

two of the four original associate justices ; a third, Blair, being of Scotch 
origin. John Marshall, 3 the great chief justice, was, like Jefferson, of Scotch 
and Welsh descent." 

Jonathan Trumbull, Connecticut's war governor (the original " Brother 
Jonathan"), was descended from a member of the ancient Scottish border 
clan of Turnbull. 4 Archibald Bulloch, the Scottish ancestor of Theodore 
Roosevelt, was likewise the Revolutionary Governor of Georgia in 1776-77. 

To pursue the subject further, it appears that of the twenty-five Presi- 
dents of the United States down to the present time, less than half the 
number were of purely English extraction. 

Of predominating English blood may be counted Washington, the two 
Adamses, Madison, William Henry Harrison, Tyler, Pierce, Fillmore, Lincoln, 
and, perhaps, Taylor. Cleveland's father was of English descent, but the 
name of his mother's father (Abner Neal), who was born in Ireland, indicates 
a Celtic origin, possibly Scottish. Benjamin Harrison and Theodore 
Roosevelt both had Scotch-Irish mothers. Of the remaining twelve 
Presidents, Monroe, Hayes, Jackson, Polk, Buchanan, Johnson, Grant, 
Arthur, and McKinley (nine) have been of Scottish descent — the last seven 
largely Ulster Scotch. Jefferson was of Welsh ancestry ; Van Buren, Dutch ; 
and Garfield a mixture of Welsh and Huguenot French. This list is in- 
structive, in showing that one-half our Presidents have been to a large ex- 
tent of Celtic extraction. (For notes on the Genealogies of the Presidents, 
see Appendix N.) 

Of the great statesmen connected with the period immediately following 
the Revolution, perhaps the four most eminent names are those of Thomas 
Jefferson, James Madison,* John Adams, and Alexander Hamilton : the first 
of Welsh origin, the second and third English, and the fourth Scotch. 
Next to these four may be mentioned the names of James Wilson, the 
Scotsman, whom Bancroft pronounces to have been the most learned civilian 
of the Constitutional Convention, than whom none were more influential, 
sagacious, or far-seeing ; John Jay, the French Huguenot ; John Dickinson, 
the English Quaker ; Roger Sherman, the English Connecticut compromiser ; 
and John Rutledge, the Ulster Scot. Of the members of the Convention 
of 1787, nine were graduates of Princeton, some of them pupils of the 
venerable Witherspoon, four were from Yale (including Livingston), three 
from Harvard, two from Columbia (including Hamilton), two from Glas- 
gow, one from Oxford, one from Pennsylvania (Williamson), and five, six, 
or seven from William and Mary (including Blair and Jefferson — the latter 
of whom had there as his chief instructor Dr. William Small, the Scottish 
teacher from whom he imbibed so many of his own liberal views). 6 Of 
the college-bred men in the convention, therefore, it would seem that 
more than half were either of Scottish descent or educational training ; 
and this fact could not have been without some influence in the result of 
its deliberations. 7 

34 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

So far as their theories of government went, it would appear that the mem- 
bers of the convention were influenced more by the French writers than by 
the English exemplars. Montesquieu was the oracle of Washington ; and 
Madison and Jefferson freely acknowledged their debt to Scottish and Con- 
tinental influences. Hamilton's allusion to the English system as a model, 
and his first plan of an elective monarchy, were both alike repugnant to 
the views of his colleagues. In the words of Yates, " he was praised by 
everybody, but supported by none." 

The most judicial mind in the Constitutional Convention was undoubt- 
edly that of the Scottish James Wilson, from Pennsylvania, the leader in the 
debates. Madison has been called the Father of the Constitution ; Wilson 
breathed into it the breath of life. " Of the fifty-five delegates," says Mc- 
Master, " Wilson was undoubtedly the best prepared, by deep and systematic 
study of the history and science of government, for the work that lay before 
him." His learning Wilson had in times past turned to excellent use, and 
in the Convention he became one of the most active members. None, with 
the exception of Gouverneur Morris, was so often on his feet during the de- 
bates, and none spoke more to the purpose. He supported direct popular 
suffrage and a single executive. He probably exercised more influence 
than any other single member in determining the character of the Constitu- 
tion, and to him is due the honor of securing later the ratification of that 
instrument by the State of Pennsylvania. He clearly foresaw and warned 
his colleagues against the evils which would and did result from the per- 
nicious New England principle of State sovereignty — a principle that, not- 
withstanding his earnest protests, was given undue acknowledgment and 
strength by the Connecticut compromise. This measure decided the ques- 
tion of representation in and election to the Senate. 

Representing the most democratic State in the confederation, Wilson, 
more than any other one man in that assemblage, strove for the adoption of 
a purely democratic form of government, one that would be entirely of the 
people, wholly for the people, and truly by the people. Opposed to him 
at times were Roger Sherman, the New England leader, John Dickinson, 
the Pennsylvania Quaker who spoke for Delaware, Luther Martin, the leader 
of the Maryland delegation, Alexander Hamilton, the sole acting member 
from New York, John Rutledge, the foremost citizen of South Carolina, 
William Paterson, who voiced the sentiments of New Jersey, and even 
Edmund Randolph, the eloquent advocate of the Virginia Plan. 

Wilson successfully refuted the arguments of his adversaries, and had his 
judgment been followed in every question as it was in most of them, the 
least satisfactory features of our Constitution would have been kept out, and 
the Republic might have been spared the loss of countless lives and treas- 
ure. From first to last, he was the chief opposer of the plan of equal 
representation of the States in the Senate, and did everything in his power 
to procure the election of senators by a direct vote of the people. 8 

The Constitution 35 

From time to time claims have been made by overzealous members of 
the Presbyterian Church that the Federal Constitution was modelled upon 
their form of Church government — a system which requires each congre- 
gation to be represented in the general assemblies of that Church by delegates 
chosen by its own congregational members.' Evidently these claims are as 
far out of the way in one direction as are in another the similar claims to 
the effect that our Constitution was copied from that of England. 10 The 
Presbyterian Church was probably no more a factor in forming the consti- 
tutional government of the United States than was the church of the 
Congregationalist, the Lutheran, the Baptist, or the Quaker. The most 
that can be said to this end is that many men who had been brought up 
under Scottish ideals of freedom and duty took a prominent part in the 
Convention of 1787, and that the result of their deliberations bears a resem- 
blance to the system of government laid down by the canons of the Scottish 
Church. This resemblance may result from the fact that the Presbyterian 
form of church government is a mean between the Congregational, or Puri- 
tan, plan — which involves the entire independence and sovereignty of each 
community, 11 and the Episcopalian, or Cavalier, plan — which would aim at 
the centralization of power in the hands of one man. 

In Pennsylvania, the opposition to the adoption of the Constitution came 
chiefly from some of the Presbyterians ; and in Virginia 1 , also, a large num- 
ber of them stood behind Patrick Henry in his opposition to that instrument. 
At the same time, it is probable that if a vote could have been taken in the 
Presbyterian Church it would have shown many more of its adherents favor- 
able to the Constitution than opposed to it. In the Pennsylvania convention 
held for its ratification, an examination of the list of delegates shows that 
considerably more than one half the number present and voting were of 
Presbyterian proclivities ; yet when the final vote for the adoption of the 
Constitution was taken, but twenty-three votes were cast against it, and forty- 
six in its favor. The Anti-Federalists in the Pennsylvania convention had 
for their leaders in the debate the three Scotch Presbyterians, Whitehill, 
Findley, and Smilie, who came from the counties of Cumberland, Westmore- 
land, and Fayette ; while the Federalists also looked for leadership to the 
two Scotch Presbyterians, Wilson and McKean. The final vote was as 
follows : 

Yeas. — George Latimer, Benjamin Rush, Hilary Baker, James Wilson, 
Thomas McKean, William MacPherson, John Hunn, George Gray, Samuel 
Ashmead, Enoch Edwards, Henry Wynkoop, John Barclay, Thomas Yardley, 
Abraham Stout, Thomas Bull, Anthony Wayne, William Gibbons, Richard 
Downing, Thomas Cheyney, John Hannum, Stephen Chambers, Robert 
Coleman, Sebastian Graff, John Hubley, Jasper Yeates, Henry Slagle, Thomas 
Campbell, Thomas Hartley, David Grier, John Black, Benjamin Pedan, 
John Arndt, Stephen Balliet, Joseph Horsfield, David Deshler, William Wil- 
son, John Boyd, Thomas Scott, John Neville, John Allison, Jonathan 

36 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

Roberts, John Richards, F. A. Muhlenberg, James Morris, Timothy Picker- 
ing, Benjamin Elliott. — Total, 46. 

Nays. — John Whitehill, John Harris, John Reynolds, Robert Whitehall, 
Jonathan Hoge, Nicholas Lutz, John Ludwig, Abraham Lincoln, John 
Bishop, Joseph Hiester, James Martain, Joseph Powell, William Findley, 
John Bard, William Todd, James Marshall, James Edgar, Nathaniel Bread- 
ing, John Smilie, Richard Baird, William Brown, Adam Orth, John Andre 
Hanna. — Total, 23. 

A very full account of the proceedings of the Pennsylvania convention 
was printed in 1888 by the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, under the 
title, Pennsylvania and the Federal Constitution, edited by John Bach Mc Mas- 
ter and Frederick D. Stone. The following statement from that work (pp. 
21, 22) may enable us to comprehend some of the motives which influenced 
the twenty-three members who comprised the opposition : 

An examination of this list reveals the fact that the little band of mal- 
contents was made up of all the delegates from the counties of Cumber- 
land, Berks, Westmoreland, Bedford, Dauphin, Fayette, half of those from 
Washington, half from Franklin, and John Whitehill, of Lancaster. The 
reason is plain. The constitution proposed for the United States was in 
many ways the direct opposite of the constitution of Pennsylvania. The 
legislature of Pennsylvania consisted of a single house. The legislature 
of the United States was to consist of two houses. The President of Penn- 
sylvania was chosen by the Assembly. The President of the United States 
was chosen by special electors. The constitution of Pennsylvania had a 
bill of rights, provided for a body of censors to meet once each seven years 
to approve or disapprove the acts of the legislature ; for a council to advise 
the President ; for annual elections ; for rotation in office, all of which were 
quite unknown to the proposed constitution for the United States. But the 
Pennsylvania constitution of 1776 was the work of the Patriot party ; of this 
party a very considerable number were Presbyterians ; and the great Pres- 
byterian counties were Cumberland, Westmoreland, Bedford, Dauphin, and 
Fayette. In opposing the new plan these men simply opposed a system of 
government which, if adopted, would force them to undo a piece of work 
done with great labor, and beheld with great pride and satisfaction. Every 
man, therefore, who gave his vote for the ratification of the national consti- 
tution, pronounced his State constitution to be bad in form, and this its 
supporters were not prepared to do. By these men, the refusal of the con 
vention to accept the amendments they offered was not regarded as ending 
the matter. They went back to the counties that sent them more determined 
than ever, but failed to gain to their side the great body of Presbyterians. 

A perusal of the journal of the Federal Convention and of the various pri- 
vate accounts of the debates ia will sufficiently indicate how far New Eng- 
land in 1787 was behind the middle colonies and Virginia in its conception 
of what constitutes a democracy. 

John Adams contended that the English Constitution was the " most 
stupendous fabric of human invention" {Works, vol. iv., p. 358), a decla- 
ration which seems to have been the source of amusement to many of his 

The Constitution 37 

contemporaries. 13 Thomas Jefferson explained Mr. Adams's attitude on the 
subject in this way : 

Adams had originally been a republican. The glamour of royalty and 
nobility during his mission to England had made him believe their fascina- 
tion a necessary ingredient in government. . . . His book on the Ameri- 
can Constitution having made known his political bias, he was taken up by 
the monarchical Federalists in his absence, and on his return to the United 
States he was made by them to believe that the general disposition of our 
citizens was favorable to monarchy. 14 

Even so usually careful a reader as John Fiske fails to recognize fully 
the various influences which were at work in the framing of the Constitution. 
In seeking to present what may appear to some to be rather too flattering a 
portrayal of the attitude and share of the New England delegates in the 
deliberations of the convention, he follows John Adams in ascribing every- 
thing to the supposed influence of the British Constitution. Fiske says : 

The most curious and instructive point concerning the peculiar execu- 
tive devised for the United States by the Federal Convention is the fact that 
the delegates proceeded upon a thoroughly false theory of what they were 
doing. . . . They were trying to copy the British Constitution, modifying 
it to suit their republican ideas ; but curiously enough, what they copied in 
creating the office of President was not the real English executive or prime 
minister, but the fictitious English executive, the sovereign. And this was 
associated in their minds with another profound misconception, which in- 
fluenced all this part of their work. They thought that to keep the legisla- 
tive and executive offices distinct and separate was the very palladium of 
liberty ; and they all took it for granted, without a moment's question, that 
the British Constitution did this thing. England, they thought, is governed 
by a King, Lords, and Commons, and the supreme power is nicely divided 
between the three, so that neither one can get the whole of it, and that is 
the safeguard of English liberty. So they arranged President, Senate, and 
Representatives to correspond, and sedulously sought to divide supreme 
power between the three, so that they might operate as checks upon each 
other. If either one should ever succeed in acquiring the whole sovereignty, 
then they thought there would be an end of American liberty. 

. . . But in all this careful separation of the executive power from the 
legislative they went wide of the mark, because they were following a 
theory which did not truly describe things as they really existed. And that 
was because the English Constitution was, and still is, covered up with a 
thick husk of legal fictions which long ago ceased to have any vitality. . . . 
In our time it has come to be perfectly obvious that so far from the English 
Constitution separating the executive power from the legislative, this is pre- 
cisely what it does not do. In Great Britain the supreme power is all lodged 
in a single body : the House of Commons. 16 

Let us examine these statements in the light of Madison's and Hamil- 
ton's elucidation of the same subject and see if those two delegates — them- 
selves originally strong admirers of the English Constitution— were really 
so entirely ignorant of its distinctions. On this subject Madison says : 

38 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

One of the principal objections inculcated by the more respectable ad- 
versaries of the Constitution, is its supposed violation of the political maxim 
that the legislative, executive, and judiciary departments ought to be sepa- 
rate and distinct. In the structure of the Federal Government, no regard, it 
is said, seems to have been paid to this essential precaution in favor of 
liberty. The several departments of power are distributed and blended in 
such a manner as at once to destroy all symmetry and beauty of form ; and 
to expose some of the essential parts of the edifice to the danger of being 
crushed by the disproportionate weight of other parts. . . . 

The oracle who is always consulted and cited on this subject is the cele- 
brated Montesquieu. . . . Let us endeavor in the first place to ascertain his 
meaning on this point. 

The British Constitution was to Montesquieu what Homer has been to 
the didactic writers on epic poetry. . . . 
f On the slightest view of the British Constitution, we must perceive that 
the legislative, executive, and judiciary departments are by no means totally 
separate and distinct from each other. . . . 

From these facts, by which Montesquieu was guided, it may clearly be 
inferred that, in saying " there can be no liberty where the legislative and 
executive powers are united in the same person, or body of magistrates," 
or " if the power of judging be not separated from the legislative and ex- 
ecutive powers," he did not mean that these departments ought to have no 
partial agency in, or no control over, the acts of each other. . ^. . 

If we look into the constitutions of the several States, we shall find, not- 
withstanding the emphatical, and, in some instances, the unqualified terms 
in which this axiom has been laid down, that there is not a single instance 
in which the several departments of power have been kept absolutely 
separate and distinct. (James Madison, Federalist, No. xlvii.) 

It was shown in the last paper, that the political apothegm there ex- 
amined does not require that the legislative, executive, and judiciary de- 
partments should be wholly unconnected with each other. I shall undertake 
in the next place to show that, unless these departments be so far con- 
nected and blended as to give to each a constitutional control over the 
others, the degree of separation which the maxim requires, as essential 
to a free government, can never in practice be duly maintained. (Ibid., 
No. xlviii). 

Hamilton's comparison of the executives under the two constitutions is 
as follows : 

I proceed now to trace the real characters of the proposed executive, as 
they are marked out in the plan of the Convention. This will serve to place 
in a strong light the unfairness of the representations which have been made 
in regard to it. 

The first thing which strikes our attention is, that the executive author- 
ity, with few exceptions, is to be vested in a single magistrate. This will 
scarcely, however, be considered as a point upon which any comparison can 
be grounded ; for if, in this particular, there be a resemblance to the king 
of Great Britain, there is not less a resemblance to the Grand Signior, to the 
Khan of Tartary, to the Man of the Seven Mountains, or to the governor 
of New York. . . . 

The President is to be the " commander-in-chief of the army and navy 
of the United States, and of the militia of the several States, when called 
into the actual service of the United States. He is to have power to grant 

The Constitution 39 

reprieves and pardons for offences against the United States, except in cases 
of impeachment ; to recommend to the consideration of Congress such 
measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient ; to convene, on extraor- 
dinary occasions, both houses of the legislature, or either of them, and in 
case of disagreement between them with respect to the time of adjournment, 
to adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper ; to take care that the 
laws be faithfully executed ; and to commission all officers of the United 
States." In most of these particulars, the power of the President will 
resemble equally that of the king of Great Britain and of the governor of New 
York. The most material points of difference are these: — First: — The 
President will have only the occasional command of such part of the militia 
of the nation as by legislative provision may be called into the actual service 
of the Union. The king of Great Britain and the governor of New York 
have at all times the entire command of all the militia within their several 
jurisdictions. . . . Second : — The President is to be commander-in-chief 
of the army and navy of the United States. In this respect his authority 
would be nominally the same with that of the king of Great Britain, but in 
substance much inferior to it. It would amount to nothing more than the 
supreme command and direction of the military and naval forces, as first 
general and admiral of the confederacy ; while that of the British king ex- 
tends to the declaring of war, and to the raising and regulating of fleets and 
armies ; all which by the Constitution under consideration would appertain 
to the legislature. . . . Third : — The power of the President in respect to 
pardons would extend to all cases except those of impeachment. The 
governor of New York may pardon in all cases, even in those of impeach- 
ment, except for treason and murder. . . . Fourth : — The President can 
only adjourn the national legislature in the single case of disagreement 
about the time of adjournment. The British monarch may prorogue or 
even dissolve the Parliament. . . . 

Hence it appears, that, except as to the concurrent authority of the Presi- 
dent in the article of treaties, it would be difficult to determine whether that 
magistrate would in the aggregate possess more or less power than the gov- 
ernor of New York. And it appears yet more unequivocally, that there is no 
pretence for the parallel which has been attempted between him and the 
king of Great Britain. But to render the contrast in this respect still more 
striking, it may be of use to throw the principal circumstances of dissimili- 
tude into a closer group. 

The President of the United States would be an officer elected by the 
people for four years : The king of Great Britain is a perpetual and 
hereditary prince. 

The one would be amenable to personal punishment and disgrace : The 
person of the Other is sacred and inviolable. 

The one would have a qualified negative upon the acts of the legislative 
body : The other has an absolute negative. 

The one would have a right to command the military and naval forces of the 
nation : The other, in addition to this right, possesses that of declaring war, 
and of raising and regulating fleets and armies by his own authority. 

The one would have a concurrent power with a branch of the legislature 
in the formation of treaties : The other is the sole possessor of the power of 
making treaties. 

The one would have a like concurrent authority in appointing to offices : 
The other is the sole author of all appointments. 

The one can confer no privileges whatever : The other can make 

40 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

denizens of aliens, noblemen of commoners ; can erect corporations, with 
all the rights incident to corporate bodies. 

The one can prescribe no rules concerning the commerce or currency of 
the nation : The other is in several respects the arbiter of commerce, and in 
this capacity can establish markets and fairs ; can regulate weights and 
measures ; can lay embargoes for a limited time ; can coin money ; can au- 
thorize or prohibit the circulation of foreign coin. 

The one has no particle of spiritual jurisdiction : The other is the su- 
preme head and governor of the national church. 

What answer shall we give to those who would persuade us that things so 
unlike resemble each other ? The same that ought to be given to those who 
tell us that a government, the whole power of which would be in the hands 
of the elective and periodical servants of the people, is an aristocracy, a 
monarchy, and a despotism. (Alexander Hamilton, Federalist, No. lxix.) 

It is only necessary to compare these statements with those of Mr. Fiske 
to see that some of our modern commentators on the Constitution have dis- 
covered a great many more things in that instrument than its authors were 
aware they had put there when drafting it. 

Just what were the contributions of England to the American Constitu- 
tion, is somewhat difficult to determine. There was certainly no manner 
of resemblance in form between the unwritten Constitution of Great Britain 
and the voluminous written instrument subscribed at Philadelphia by the 
delegates from the American colonies in September, 1787. It is true, the 
first ten amendments, proposed by Congress in 1789, may be said to consti- 
tute a Bill of Rights, having been adopted with that end in view. In form 
they do bear an outward resemblance to those limitations upon kings which, 
until recently, were regarded in England as the foundation and chief bulwark 
of liberty. But the vital substance of the ten amendments to our Constitu- 
tion finds few counterparts in similar enunciations of the British legislature. 
In this day some of the minor provisions of these amendments, which no doubt 
seemed vital to our fathers, appear to us to be chiefly valuable as reminders 
of the excesses of tyranny from which they had escaped, and of the kind of 
constitutional government under which those excesses had been committed. 
As a matter of fact, the adoption of the first ten amendments to the 
American Constitution by Congress was due chiefly to popular clamor, and 
not from conviction on the part of the legislators that they were necessary 
in order to complete the Constitution. The framers of the original docu- 
ment almost without exception deemed most of the provisions of these amend- 
ments superfluous. 

The declarations of the Bill of Rights passed by the English Parliament 
in 1689 were as follows : 

1. That the pretended power of suspending of laws, or the execution of 
laws by regal authority without consent of Parliament, is illegal. 

2. That the pretended power of dispensing with laws, or the execution of 
laws by regal authority, as it hath been assumed and exercised of late, is illegal. 

The Constitution 41 

3. That the commission for erecting the late court of commissioners 
for ecclesiastical causes, and all other commissions and courts of like nature, 
are illegal and pernicious. 

4. That levying money for or to the use of the Crown, by pretence of 
prerogative, without grant of Parliament, for longer time or in other manner 
than the same is or shall be granted, is illegal. 

5. That it is the right of subjects to petition the king, and all commit- 
ments and prosecutions for such petitioning are illegal. 

6. That the raising or keeping a standing army within the kingdom in 
time of peace, unless it be with consent of Parliament, is against law. 

7. That the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their de- 
fence suitable to their conditions, and as allowed by law. 

8. That elections of members of Parliament ought to be free. 

9. That the freedom of speech, and debates or proceedings in Parlia- 
ment, ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of 

10. That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines im- 
posed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. 

11. That jurors ought to be duly impanelled and returned, and jurors 
which pass upon men in trials for high treason ought to be freeholders. 

12. That all grants and promises of fines and forfeitures of particular 
persons before conviction are illegal and void. 

13. And that for redress of all grievances, and for the amending, 
strengthening, and preserving of the laws, Parliament ought to be held 

We have but to read over the amendments to the American Consti- 
tution and compare them with the foregoing English Bill of Rights to per- 
ceive how much they are opposed, both in letter and spirit, to the whole 
theory and practice of the science of government as applied by England 
during the whole of the eighteenth and the greater part of the nineteenth 
century. In doing this we realize that the amendments are not so much 
limitations restricting the operation of government under the American Con- 
stitution as they are eternal protests against a recurrence of the evils which 
had been suffered under the Constitution of Britain. 

The first amendment provides that — 

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. 

Or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press. 

The absence of the first of these provisions from the constitution of Eng- 
land, even to this day, is what, perhaps, more than any one thing else, led 
to the early and rapid British settlement of America, and drove to its 
shores such a large proportion of the bravest and noblest of the English and 
Scottish people. The necessity for the second provision was probably first 
impressed upon the minds of Americans by the prosecution, on informa- 
tion, of the printer, John Peter Zenger, for libelling the English governor 
of New York in 1735. 

The second amendment announces that " A well-regulated militia being 
necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and 

42 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

bear arms shall not be infringed." The English Bill of Rights permits only 
those who are Protestants to " have arms for their defence." 

The third amendment provides that no soldier in time of peace shall 
be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner. This cor- 
responds with a provision in the English Petition of Rights passed by Par- 
liament and approved by Charles I. in 1628. The only provision in the 
English Bill of Rights bearing on this subject is, that a standing army shall 
not be kept within the kingdom without consent of Parliament. 

The fourth amendment relates to the right of search or seizure, and 
requires all warrants for arrest or search to be specific, and supported by 
oath. There is no corresponding clause in the English Bill of Rights. 

The fifth amendment requires all criminal indictments to be made by a 
grand jury ; and provides that no person shall for the same offence twice be 
put in jeopardy of life or limb ; nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property 
without due process of law. The nearest corresponding provision in the 
Bill of Rights is that contained in the eleventh clause, suggesting " That 
jurors ought to be duly impanelled and returned," instead of being creatures 
of the judge or prosecutor. 

The sixth amendment gives the accused the right of a speedy trial before 
witnesses in criminal cases. 

The seventh amendment assures the right of trial by jury. It appears 
from Olaus Wormius that this system was first introduced into Denmark by 
Regnerus, surnamed Lodborg, who began to reign in the year 820, from 
whom Ethelred of England is said to have borrowed it. It was Henry II. 
who brought into general use in England the trial by jury, afterwards incor- 
porated in Magna Charta and confirmed by King John. 

The eighth amendment is a counterpart of the tenth provision of the 
English Bill of Rights, prohibiting excessive bail or fines, or cruel and 
unusual methods of punishment. 

The ninth amendment states that the enumeration in the Constitution of 
certain rights shall not be construed as a denial or disparagement of others 
"retained by the people." This, of course, would be an anomaly in the 
constitution of a monarchical government, where all rights possessed by the 
people have first to be granted by the supreme power, the Crown. 

The tenth amendment reserves to the States and to the people all powers 
not delegated to the general government. 

A comparison of all these amendments with the English Bill of Rights, 
therefore, shows that one only out of the ten is copied from the charter of 
British constitutional privileges. Nearly all the amendments show in them- 
selves that they were devised and worded to meet conditions which were 
either pertinent or peculiar to American life and experience. To a large 
extent they form an embodiment of certain features of the common law 
as it had been applied in America to American conditions for more than a 
hundred years before 1787. The provisions for free speech, a free press, 

The Constitution 43 

freedom of religion, freedom to bear arms, freedom from unwarranted 
search or seizure, freedom from indictment on secret information, and 
freedom from the usurpation of the people's natural rights, were all of 
American origin. They were attached to the Constitution because Americans 
had learned by bitter experience, in the century between the enactment of 
the English Bill of Rights and the adoption of the American Constitution, 
that their absence from the British charter led to numerous abuses and 
perversions of justice on the part of imported judges and governors. 

In short, the difference between the British and the American Constitu- 
tions is a fundamental one. The former is a concession of privileges to 
the people by the rulers : the latter, a grant of authority by the people to 
the rulers. 

But before leaving our original Scotch commentator, let us see just 
what his views were on the question of the kinship between the British and 
American Constitutions. Some expression of these views is to be found in 
No. lxxxiv. of the Federalist : 

The several bills of rights, in Great Britain, form its constitution. . . . 

It has been several times truly remarked, that bills of rights are, in their 
origin, stipulations between kings and their subjects, abridgments of pre- 
rogative in favor of privilege, reservations of rights not surrendered to the 
prince. Such was Magna Charta, obtained by the barons, sword in hand, 
from King John. Such were the subsequent confirmations of that charter 
by succeeding princes. Such was the Petition of Right assented to by 
Charles the First, in the beginning of his reign. Such also was the declara- 
tion of rights presented by the Lords and Commons to the Prince of Orange 
in 1688, and afterwards thrown into the form of an act of Parliament, called 
the Bill of Rights. It is evident, therefore, that according to their primitive 
signification, they have no application to constitutions professedly founded 
upon the power of the people, and executed by their immediate representa- 
tives and servants. Here, in strictness, the people surrender nothing ; and 
as they retain everything, they have no need of particular reservations. 
" We, the People of the United States, to secure the blessings of liberty to 
ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this constitution for the 
United States of America." This is a better recognition of popular rights 
than volumes of those aphorisms which make the principal figure in several 
of our State bills of rights, and which would sound much better in a treatise 
of ethics than in a constitution of government. 

While it may be a fact that the New England members, and especially 
the Massachusetts members of the convention, were imbued with the truly 
English idea of uniting the executive and legislative branches by making 
the executive head merely the creature of the legislature, 18 yet that this plan 
was not adopted is perhaps due to the efforts of those members whose birth 
or training had not been such as to bring them into accordance with English 
traditions. The idea of a representative form of government was novel to the 
men from New England, and contrary to their accustomed methods ; so that 
from the date of the first gathering it took several days' time to win them over 

44 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

to it. James Wilson, the Pennsylvania Scotsman, led in the opposition to the 
English and New England plan of vesting the executive power mainly in the 
legislature ; and to say, as Mr. Fiske does, that Wilson did not know at what 
he was aiming is to belittle the intelligence of the convention's clearest mind. 

The chief contribution of New England was the essentially English 
suggestion of compromise. The conditions under which one of these com- 
promises was made were so unwise, though so characteristic of the typical 
English commercial spirit actuating its promoters, as to make it a matter of 
doubt whether on the whole the evil consequences arising from the com- 
promises were not greater than the benefits which they secured. These con- 
ditions involved the demand for special privileges by the shipping interest of 
New England, and the prohibition of a tax on exports, coupled with the recog- 
nition of the right of the southern states to continue for twenty years the 
importation of negroes, and to maintain indefinitely the institution of slavery. 
A bargain was made between the two sections, and all three propositions 
were carried by the united votes of New England and all the southern states 
save Virginia. 

Certainly, the one republican institution which forms the chief glory 
and boast of New England, that of local self-government, cannot be clearly 
traced back to England. Where it did originate is a disputed ques- 
tion. Mr. Douglas Campbell, in his inquiry into the origin of certain 
American institutions, has traced the beginnings of many of them to Holland. 
While there is some doubt as to the sufficiency of his proof in the case 
of township organization, 17 he has at least made it apparent that at the time 
the Pilgrims left Holland that country and its institutions were infinitely 
more analogous to the government established at Plymouth than to any like 
institutions in England. 18 In concluding his review of some of the Dutch 
contributions to America, Mr. Campbell sums them up as follows 19 : 

Such are the leading institutions, political and legal, for which the 
American Republic is indebted, directly or indirectly, to the Netherland 
Republic, itself the heir of all the ages. Some of them, especially our 
written constitutions, have been greatly improved upon ; but at the time of 
their introduction into America few, if any, of them could be found in any 
country of Europe except the Netherlands. Having completed our sketch 
of their history, let us now bring them together, in order that we may appre- 
ciate their combined importance. 

First comes the Federal Constitution, a written instrument as opposed 
to the unwritten English Constitution. Next are the provisions of this 
instrument placing checks on the power of the President in declaring war 
and peace, and in the appointment of judges and all important executive 
officers. Then comes the whole organization of the Senate — a mutable and 
yet a permanent body, representing independent bodies politic, and not caste 
in State and Church. After these features of the national system, but not less 
important, follow our State constitutions, our freedom of religion, our free 
press, our wide suffrage, and our written ballot. With these come the free 
schools, for boys and girls alike, the township system (with its sequence 
of local self-government in county and State), the independence of the 

The Constitution 45 

judiciary, the absence of primogeniture, the subjection of land to execution 
for debt, and the system of recording deeds and mortgages. Added to these 
are our public prosecutors of crime in every county, the constitutional 
guarantee that every accused person shall have subpoenas for his witnesses 
and counsel for his defence, the reforms in our penal and prison system, the 
emancipation of married women, and the whole organization of our public 
charitable and reformatory work. 

Taking these institutions all together, is there any cause for wonder that 
they excite astonishment among modern English scholars and statesmen 
who, looking beneath the mere surface resemblances of language and 
domestic habits, seek an explanation of the manifest difference between the 
people of England and a people in the United States assumed by them to 
be of the same blood ? These observers, unlike some of our American 
writers, see plainly enough that our institutions are not inherited from 
England, however much we may have of English characteristics. 

The simple fact is, that the whole theory of society and government in 
the two countries has always been radically different. Under such condi- 
tions, it was but natural that our forefathers should turn for their precedents, 
not to a monarchy or an aristocracy, but to a republic — a republic which 
was the beacon-light of the English Commonwealth, and whose people were 
our warmest unselfish sympathizers throughout the Revolution, as they also 
proved themselves to the Union cause during our late struggle for a national 

The latest writer on the subject, Mr. Sydney George Fisher, in his book 
on The Evolution of the Constitution of the United States, takes issue with 
Mr. Campbell and with all other writers who attribute the origin of American 
institutions for the most part to European influences. In an exhaustive ex- 
amination of early trading and colonial charters and laws, he presents a great 
many facts tending to prove that the American system of government is not 
copied from others at all, but is the result of a slow and gradual period of 
evolution and growth which took place on this continent for two hundred 
years after 1584. This is both a philosophical and a satisfactory explanation 
of the origin of our institutions, and Mr. Fisher's book goes far toward 
making the reader believe that it is also the true one. In referring to 
English sources of the Constitution, this writer says 20 : 

After reading the assertions of learned writers that our Constitution was 
modelled on the British government as it existed in 1787, I have sometimes 
turned to the words of the Constitution to see the resemblance, and have 
never been able to find it. As one reads along, sentence after sentence, 
everything seems so un-English and so original and peculiar to our own 
locality that the mind is forced to the conclusion that it either grew up as a 
natural product of the soil or was invented offhand — struck off at a given 
time, as Mr. Gladstone says. I recommend to those who believe in the 
British model theory to adopt this simple plan : Read our Constitution, 
sentence by sentence, from beginning to end, and see how many sentences 
they can trace to an origin in the British government. 

I do not deny that in a certain sense it is all English. ... I would 
be the last person in the world to dispute the Anglo-Saxon influence in our 
civilization. But all this is very different from the dogma some wish to 

46 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

establish, that our Constitution was taken or copied from or suggested by 
the forms of the British government as it existed in 1787. . . . 

In the first eleven amendments to the Constitution, a number of the 
provisions about trial by jury and freedom of speech were doubtless evolved 
from the experience of the race in England. But even these, as already 
shown, were worked out slowly and re-evolved on American soil. In the 
body of the Constitution itself — the political framework proper — there is 
little or nothing that can be traced to the forms of the British government 
as it existed in 1787 or at any other time for hundreds of years previous. 

I do not deny that the framers of our Constitution considered and dis- 
cusssed the forms of the British Constitution. But they considered them 
principally, as the minutes of their debates will show, for the purpose, or at 
any rate with the result, of avoiding them. They were intelligent men, — a 
large number of them were college-bred, — and they discussed the forms of 
government of all countries. They were not unmindful of the example of 
Holland, the democracies of Greece, the Roman republic and empire, and 
the free republics of the Middle Ages. They took what light they could 
from them all ; and I think as good an argument could be framed to show 
that they were guided by what they knew of classic antiquity as could be 
brought forward to prove that they were guided by the British Constitution. 

But the foundation for all their final decisions, the basis which the forms 
of government in Europe merely illustrated or made more certain, was their 
own experience of nearly two hundred years with the colonial charters and 
constitutions and the constitutions of 1776. What they took from England 
went back through that two hundred years, and then not to the British 
government, but to the forms of the old trading charters. What had been 
envolved from the trading charters had been so long with us that it was 
completely Americanized, and it was valued by the framers of the Constitu- 
tion for that reason, and because it had been tested by two hundred years of 
American life. 

They did not commit the absurdity of skipping those two hundred 
years of their history, or of crossing an ocean and entering other countries 
to copy constitutions. . . . They took their own experience as it was up 
to that date in the place and community for which they were making a frame 
of government. They made no skips or jumps, but went backward in the 
past directly from themselves and in their own line, taking for their guide 
that which was nearest to them and latest developed, provided it had been 
tested in that line of their own past. 81 


1 Douglas Campbell, The Puritan in Holland, England, and America, vol. ii., pp. 481, 
487, 488. 

3 Bancroft speaks of him as the ablest man south of the Potomac. 

3 Marshall's mother was of the Scotch family of Keith. 

4 See Autobiography of John Trumbull, p. 12. New York, 1841. 

5 On the twenty-seventh of May [1776], Cary from the committee presented to the 
[Virginia] convention the declaration of rights which Mason had drafted. For the next fort- 
night the great truths which it proclaimed, and which were to form the groundwork of 
American institutions, employed the thoughts of the convention. One clause only received 
a material amendment. Mason had written that all should enjoy the fullest toleration in 

The Constitution 47 

the exercise of religion. ... A young man, then unknown to fame, . . . proposed 
an amendment. He was James Madison, the son of an Orange County planter, bred in the 
school of Presbyterian dissenters under Witherspoon at Princeton, trained by his own studies, 
by meditative rural life in the Old Dominion, by an ingenuous indignation at the persecution 
of the Baptists, and by the innate principles of right, to uphold the sanctity of religious 
freedom. He objected to the word " toleration," because it implied an established religion, 
which endured dissent only as a condescension ; and as the earnestness of his convictions 
overcame his modesty, he proceeded to demonstrate that "all men are equally entitled to 
the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience." . . . This was 
the first achievement of the wisest civilian of Virginia. — Bancroft, vol. iv., p. 417. 

6 In the spring of 1760 I went to William and Mary College where I continued two 
years. It was my great good fortune, and what probably fixed the destinies of my life, that 
Dr. William Small of Scotland was then professor of Mathematics, a man profound in most 
of the useful branches of science, with a happy talent of communication, correct and gentle- 
manly manners, and an enlarged and liberal mind. He most happily for me became soon 
attached to me and made me his daily companion when not engaged in the school ; and from 
his conversation I got my first views of the expansion of science, and of the system of things 
in which we are placed. — Jefferson's Autobiography, p. 2. 

'Bancroft, vol. vi., p. 211. 

8 See Appendix A (James Wilson and the Convention of 1787). 

9 Grouping together, then, these facts among others — the fact that Presbyterianism is in 
its own nature a system of pure representative republican government, and as such in strik- 
ing harmony, both in form and spirit, with that of the State and nation ; that it has always 
been peculiarly odious to tyrants ; the numerous patriotic deliverances of the Synod of New 
York and Philadelphia and of some of the Presbyteries of our Church ; the fact that ' ' the 
first voice publicly raised in America to dissolve all connection with Great Britain," was that 
of the Presbyterians, the Westmoreland County resolutions and the Mecklenburg Declara- 
tion ; the fact that Witherspoon, a Presbyterian of the most authentic type, represented in 
the Continental Congress the compact Presbyterianism of the land, and that (besides his 
other numerous and exceedingly important services) he threw the whole weight of his own 
personal influence and that of those he represented, first in favor of the Declaration of Inde- 
pendence and then in favor of the organization of the States into a confederate union — and 
we have some of the grounds upon which to base an estimate of the share which Presbyteri- 
ans had in building and launching that national vessel that now rides so proudly upon the 
billows with forty millions of voyagers on board. — W. P. Breed, Presbyterians and the 
Revolution, pp. 177-179. 

10 See Letters and Other Writings of James Madison, vol. ii., p. 144; vol. iv., pp. 469- 
475, 480, 482 ; Works of John Adams, vol. iv., p. 358 ; Works of Thomas Jefferson, vol. 
ix., p. 97. 

11 The choice between a confederacy and a republic was very much the same as a choice 
between Congregationalism and Presbyterianism ; for Congregationalism is a confederacy of 
independent churches, but Presbyterianism is an organized representative and constitutional 
government. The Presbyterian form of government was familiar to the great mass of the 
inhabitants in the middle and southern colonies ; it was the form of government which 
Puritan Episcopacy has ever preferred. The Congregationalism of Connecticut and of other 
parts of New England tended in the same direction. There is no reason to doubt that 
Presbyterianism influenced the framers of the Constitution in their efforts to erect a national 
organism, — a constitutional republic. But Congregationalism also had its influence in de- 
fining the limitations of the supremacy of the general government and in the reservation of 
the sovereignty of the States in all those affairs which were not assigned to the general 
government. It is true, Presbyterianism was prepared for such limitations by the Scotch 
Barrier Act of 1697, which prevented hasty legislation by an appeal to all the Presbyteries 

48 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

of the Church ; and still more by the persistent resistance of American Presbyterianism to 
any legislative power in the Synod, without the consent of the Presbyteries. But the limi- 
tations of the general government in the American Constitution were beyond anything known 
to Presbyterianism before, and the reserved rights of the States were vastly in excess of any 
rights ever claimed or exercised by Presbyteries. The American form of civil government 
was a happy combination of some of the best features presented in Presbyterianism and in 
Congregationalism. — Briggs, American Presbyterianism, pp. 356, 357. 
13 See Bancroft, vol. vi., book iii. 

13 See Madison's Works, vol. ii., p. 144; vol. iv., pp. 469-475, 480-482. 

14 Writings of Thomas Jefferson, vol. ix., p. 97. 
16 Critical Period of American History, p. 289. 

16 See extracts from debates in the Constitutional Convention, and particularly the words 
of Sherman and Gerry (Appendix A). 

17 Campbell, The Puritan in Holland, England, and America, vol. ii., pp. 426-430. 
18 Ibid., vol. ii., chap. xxii. 

,9 Ibid., vol. ii., pp. 465-467 (by permission of Messrs. Harper & Brothers). 

20 The Evolution of the Constitution of the United States, pp. 90-93. 

21 See Appendix B (Pennsylvania's Formative Influence). 



IN more recent years Scotland's contribution to the United States has 
been no less remarkable in the number and high standing of the 
Scottish names which appear on America's Roll of Honor than it was in 
the early days of the Republic. 

Starting with the governors of the States and Territories, a brief exam- 
ination of the civil lists published in Lanman's Biographical Annals of the 
Civil Government, a semi-official work, shows that up to the year in which 
that book was printed (1886) there have been about half a dozen more than 
one thousand State or Territorial governors in office since 1789. Of these, 
judging from the names alone, more than two hundred are of evident Scot- 
tish descent, and it is altogether probable that if a closer inspection were 
to be made a great many more would be found of that race, although bear- 
ing names alike common to Scotland and England. In connection with the 
same subject it may be remarked that, of the colonial governors sent from 
England to the American colonies before 1776, and of the provincial gov- 
ernors from that time to 1789, upwards of forty were of Scottish blood, 
among them being Robert Hunter (1710), William Burnett (1720), John 
Montgomerie (1728), John Hamilton (1736), Cadwallader Colden (1760), 
John, Earl of Dunmore (1770), James Robertson (1780), all of New York ; 
Robert Barclay (1682), John Skene (1686), Lord Neil Campbell (1687), 
Andrew Hamilton, John Hamilton (1736), William Livingston (1776), all of 
New Jersey ; Andrew Hamilton (1701), Sir William Keith (17 17), Patrick 
Gordon (1726), James Logan (1736), James Hamilton (1748), Joseph Reed 
(1778), all of Pennsylvania ; and all, except the one last named, governors of 
Delaware also ; John McKinley (1777), of Delaware ; Alexander Spotswood 
(1710), William Gooch (?) (1727), Robert Dinwiddie (1752), John Camp- 
bell (1756), John Blair (1767), William Nelson (1770), Lord Dunmore 
(1772), Patrick Henry (1776), Thomas Nelson (1781), all of Virginia; 
William Drummond (1663), Gabriel Johnston (1734), Matthew Rowan 
( J 753)» Alexander Martin (1782), Samuel Johnston (1788), all of North 
Carolina; Joseph Morton (?) (1682), Richard Kirk (1684), James Moore 
(1719), William Campbell (1775), John Rutledge (1779), all of South 
Carolina; William Erwin (1775), Archibald Bulloch (1776), John Houston 
(1778), Edward Telfair (1786), all of Georgia; and George Johnstone 
(1763), of Florida. 

Of the State governors from 1789 to 1885, the Scotch furnished to Penn- 
sylvania nearly one-half her chief executives ; to Virginia, nearly one- 
third ; to North Carolina, more than one-fourth ; to South Carolina, nearly 


50 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

one-third ; to Georgia, more than one-half ; to Alabama, more than one- 
fifth ; to Mississippi, about one-fifth ; to Louisiana, more than one-fifth ; 
to Texas, about one-third ; to Tennessee, nearly one-half ; to Kentucky, 
about one-third ; to Ohio, one-half ; to Indiana, more than one-third ; to 
Illinois, nearly one-third ; to Missouri, nearly one-half. 

Among other celebrated Scottish characters of colonial times may be 
mentioned Captain William Kidd, the notorious pirate, Major Richard 
Stobo, and possibly Sir William Johnson, Great Britain's celebrated Indian 
agent in the Mohawk valley. 

Of Scotch descent, also, on both sides of his house, was General George 
Rogers Clark, the record of whose daring and successful campaigns north 
of the Ohio River in 1778, is not surpassed in American history. To this 
man alone the United States owes that part of its territory lying between 
the Ohio and Mississippi rivers ; and had it not been for the conquest of 
this empire from the British by Clark and his Scotch-Irish soldiers, the 
States of Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, Illinois, Iowa, Wisconsin, and Minnesota 
might have been to-day a portion of the Dominion of Canada. 1 

In the naval wars of 1776 and later, we find among the most celebrated 
commanders the following of Scottish birth or descent : John Paul Jones, 
Samuel Nicholson, Richard Dale, Alexander Murray, Charles Stewart, James 
Barron, John Rodgers, Sr., John Rodgers, Jr., Thomas McDonough, Matthew 
Galbraith Perry, Oliver Hazard Perry, 3 Franklin Buchanan. 

Some well-known border heroes of Scottish descent, besides George 
Rogers Clark, were Adam and Andrew Poe, Samuel Brady, Captain Jack, 
Simon Kenton, Kit Carson, David Crockett, and Samuel Houston. 

Among the American generals and warriors since the Revolution none 
rank higher than Andrew Jackson, Winfield Scott, Hugh Brady, Zachary 
Taylor, U. S. Grant, James B. McPherson, George B. McClellan, J. E. 
Johnston, Stonewall Jackson, J. E. B. Stuart, James Longstreet, John A. 
Rawlins, Robert H. Milroy, Lew Wallace, Irvin McDowell, Q. A. Gilmore, 
Hugh Kilpatrick, Francis P. Blair, John F. Reynolds, Fitz-John Porter, 
David Hunter, William H. Jackson, Alexander W. Campbell, David Bell, 
William Birney, Horace Porter, John A. McNulta, Alexander Hays, La- 
fayette McLaws, D. M. Gregg, Schuyler Hamilton, John J. Abercrombie, 
William H. Lytle, John B. S. Todd, Winfield S. Hancock, Clement A. 
Finley, Isaac Ridgeway Trimble, James Ronald Chalmers, George A. 
McCall, John A. McClernand, Nathan B. Forrest, Benjamin McCul- 
loch, John B. Magruder, John B. Gordon, John A. Logan, Theodore 
Roosevelt, 3 Henry W. Lawton, Frederick Funston, and Daniel, George 
W., Robert L., Alexander McD., Daniel, Jr., Edwin S., Edward M., and 
Anson G. McCook, all of Scottish blood. 

In American politics this race has been represented by such individuals 
as Thomas H. Benton, John C. Calhoun, 4 Jefferson Davis, James G. Blaine, 
Thomas A. Hendricks, Joseph E. McDonald, John Bell, Alexander H. 

American Politics 51 

Stephens, Samuel Randall, J. C. Breckenridge, John G. Carlisle, Simon 
Cameron, the Livingstons of New York, William B. Allison, John B. Gib- 
son, Matthew S. Quay, Calvin S. Brice, Marcus A. Hanna, Whitelaw Reid, 
J. Sterling Morton, Wayne McVeagh, Chauncey Mitchell Depew, Robert 
Todd Lincoln, Stephen A. Douglas, Adlai E. Stevenson, Stephen B. Elkins, 
Daniel S. Lamont, Arthur P. Gorman, William McKinley. 6 

In the Presidents' Cabinets, the Scotch have been represented as Secre- 
taries of State by Edward Livingston, Louis McLane, John Forsyth, John C. 
Calhoun, James Buchanan, Jeremiah S. Black, James G. Blaine, John Hay ; 
Secretaries of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton, George W. Campbell, 
Alexander J. Dallas, William H. Crawford, Louis McLane, Thomas Ewing, 
Thomas Corwin, James Guthrie, Howell Cobb, Salmon P. Chase, Hugh Mc- 
Culloch ; Secretaries of War, Henry Knox, James McHenry, John Arm- 
strong, James Monroe, William H. Crawford, George Graham, John C. 
Calhoun, James Barbour, Peter B. Porter, John Bell, James M. Porter, 
George W. Crawford, Jefferson Davis, Simon Cameron, U. S. Grant, James 
D. Cameron, George W. McCrary, Alexander Ramsey, Robert Todd Lincoln, 
Daniel S. Lamont ; Secretaries of the Navy, Paul Hamilton, Thomas W. 
Gilmer, William A. Graham, John P. Kennedy, James C. Dobbin, George M. 
Robeson, Nathan W. Goff ; Secretaries of the Interior, Thomas Ewing, 
Alexander H. H. Stuart, Robert McClelland, James Harlan, Henry M. 
Teller ; Postmasters-General, John McLean, James Campbell, Montgomery 
Blair, Frank Hatton ; Attorneys-General, John Breckenridge, Felix Grundy, 
Jeremiah S. Black, James Speed, John W. Griggs ; United States Senators, 
(since i860), Blair (2), Cameron (2), Cockrell, Gibson, Logan, McMillan, 
McPherson, Mitchell (2), Stewart, Teller, McEnery, Caffery, Butler, Mc- 
Laurin, Cannon, Vance, Johnston, Houston, Bailey, Blaine, Burnside, Gor- 
don, Sharon, Armstrong, Beck, Wallace, Thurman, Patterson (2), Oglesby, 
McDonald (2), McCreery, Brownlow, Caldwell, Kelly, Ramsey, Robertson, 
Scott (2), Tipton, Corbett, Harlan, Hill, Pomeroy, Wilson, Ross, Dixon, 
Davis (2), Guthrie, Grimes, Welch, Cowan, McDougall, Henderson, Hen- 
dricks, Nesmith, Carlisle, Breckenridge, Kennedy, Johnson, Hunter, Hemp- 
hill, Douglas, Morton, McComas, Ross, Clark, Foster, McCumber, Hanna, 
Culberson, Hamilton (2), Mills, Kyle, McBride, Brice, Lindsay, Blackburn, 
Palmer, Cullom, Call, Kenney, Beveridge, and others ; Speakers of the 
House, John Bell, James K. Polk, Robert M. T. Hunter, Howell Cobb, 
James L. Orr, James G. Blaine, Michael C. Kerr, Samuel J. Randall, John 
G. Carlisle, David B. Henderson. 

In literature may be named Washington Irving, Edgar Allan Poe, Her- 
man Melville, Joel Chandler Harris, Lew Wallace, Marion Crawford,Thomas 
Nelson Page, Maurice Thompson ; in art, Gilbert Stuart, J. McNeil Whistler, 
Walter MacEwen, George Inness, J. Q. A. Ward, James Wilson McDonald, 
James D. Smillie, Alexander Doyle, E. F. Andrews, Thomas Crawford, 
Frederick MacMonnies, John W. Alexander ; in music, Edward MacDowell. 

Y/ v Ukaj<^- 

52 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

In practical science, whether the credit for the invention of the telegraph 
be given to Charles Morrison, to Joseph Henry, or to Samuel Finley Morse, 
each of whom contributed towards it, the honor still belongs to the Scotch. 
Edison's mother was Mary Elliott, of Scottish blood ; and John Ericsson 
had in his veins a strain of the same virile current. Likewise, William 
Henry, James Rumsey, and Robert Fulton, who each had a share in the inven- 
tion of the steamboat, were all three Scotch ; as well as Alexander Graham 
Bell and Elisha Gray, the inventors of the telephone, and the McCormicks, 
who did so much for the improvement of harvesting machinery. Drs. D. 
Hayes Agnew and Frank Hamilton the eminent surgeons, Alexander Wilson 
the ornithologist, and Asa Gray the botanist, all of Scottish descent, are also 
ranked among the greatest in their respective professions. 

In no departments of American civil life, however, is the Scottish influ- 
ence more marked and dominating than in those of the judiciary and the 
press. The interpretation of law in America has been chiefly the work 
of non-English judges ; and perhaps it is not too much to say that the 
distinctive character of American jurisprudence is due to the preponder- 
ating influence of men of Celtic blood at the bench and bar. 

Of the fifty judges of the United States Supreme Court from 1789 to 
1882, we find not more than twenty-two of probable English blood ; Jay and 
Duval, of French ; Marshall, of Welsh and Scotch ; Rutledge, Wilson, Blair, 
two Johnsons, Paterson, Moore, Livingston, Todd, Thompson, Trimble, 
McLean, Barbour, McKinley, Daniel, Nelson, Grier, Campbell, Miller, 
Davis, Harlan, of Scottish ; and Wayne, Catron, and Chase of mixed 

The first newspaper printed in America — the Boston News-Letter — was 
the enterprise of a Scotchman bearing the characteristic name of John 
Campbell. In recent times, among editors of the first rank, we find as repre- 
sentatives of the Scottish race : James Gordon Bennett, Horace Greeley, 
Henry W. Grady, Murat Halstead, Samuel Medary, Joseph Medill, James 
W. Scott, Alexander K. McClure, John A. Cockerill, Whitelaw Reid, Wash- 
ington and John R. McLean, Joseph B. McCullagh, Richard Smith, 
John Russell Young, Henry Watterson, " Richelieu " Robinson, Beriah 
Wilkins, Robert W. Patterson. 

Among America's prominent business men of Scottish descent may be 
named A. T. Stewart, Robert Stuart, Peter Cooper, John I. Blair, John 
Crerar, James Lenox, Andrew Carnegie, John Davison Rockefeller. 

Daniel Webster, the most brilliant statesman New England has given to 
the country, was likewise not of English origin in the paternal line, but came 
from the New Hampshire Scotch. 8 

In view of these facts can it not with propriety be contended that the 
Scottish race, in proportion to its relative strength in the New World, has 
contributed to America a vastly greater number of her leaders in thought 
and action than has any other ? 

American Politics 



1 A list of the officers of the Illinois Regiment and of the Crockett Regiment : 

Brig.-General — George Rogers Clark. Lieut. -Col. — John Montgomery. Majors 
— Thomas Quirk, George Slaughter. Captains — John Bailey, Richard Brashear, Abraham 
Chaplin, Benjamin Fields, Robert George, John Gerault, Richard Harrison, Abraham Kellar, 
Richard McCarty, John Rogers, Benjamin Roberts, Mark Thomas, Isaac Taylor, Robert 
Todd, John Williams. Lieutenants — Richard Clark, William Clark, James Merriweather, 
James Montgomery, James Robertson, William Roberts, Joseph Saunders, Jarret Williams. 
Ensigns — William Asher, Laurence Slaughter. Cornet — John Thurston. 

Crockett's Regiment: Lieut. -Col. — Joseph Crockett. Major — George Walls. Sur- 
geon — Charles Greer. Captains — John Chapman (killed), William Cherry, John Ker- 
ney, Benjamin Kinley (died), Peter Moore, Abraham Lipton, Thomas Young. Ensigns — 
Henry Daring, Samuel Ball Greene, Hugh McGavock. 

For George Rogers Clark's descent, see p. 30, note n. 

The names of the following Scotch-Irishmen and others are taken from a list of the 
*' Noncommissioned Officers and Soldiers of the Illinois Regiment and the Western Army 
under the Command of General George Rogers Clark." The full list appears in the Vir- 
ginia Historical Magazine \ vol. i., pp. 131-141 : 

John Allen, Sr., John Allen, Jr., John Anderson, Samuel Allen (Sergeant), David Allen, 
Isaac Allen, Francis Adams, Wm. Bell, John Blair, David Bailey, Richard Breeden, James 
Brown (S.), Wm. Berry, James Bentley, John Bentley, Lon Brown, James Baxter (Corporal), 
J. B. Biron (S.), Colin Brown, Wm. Barry, Thos. Benton or Bernton, John Breeden (S.), 
Samuel Bird, Wm. Bowen (C), John Barber, Robert Burnett (died), James Bryant, George 
Burk, John Burris, John Boyles, Ebenezer Bowing, Asher Brown, Adam Bingoman, Samuel 
Blackford, Simon Burney, Lewis Brown, Collin Brown, Daniel Bolton, John Clark, Andrew 
Clark, Richard Chapman, Edward Chapman, Wm. Chapman, Patrick Cornelia, Wm. 
Crassley, John Cowan, Andrew Cannon, James Curry, Patrick Conroy, Joseph Cooper, 
Ramsey Cooper, Thomas Connolly, John Conn, George Campbell (S.), John Campbell, John 
Cowdry, Andrew Cowan, Daniel Calvin, James Corder, Rice Curtis, Ellick Chamber, 
Edward Cockran, George Cockran, Dennis Coheron, James Cameron (C), Daniel Cowgill, 
James Cox, Andrew Codes, James Dawson, James Dawson, John Doyle, Benj. Duncan, 
Archibald Duncan, Charles Duncan, David Duncan, Nimrod Duncan, Joseph Duncan, 
Samuel Duncan, John Duff, Joseph Donon, Abraham Frazier (S.), Henry Foster, John 
Grimes, John Gordon, John George, John Garret, Samuel Gibbons, David Glenn, James 
Graham, Samuel Humphries, Thomas Hays, Barney Higgons, Miles Hart, James Hays, 
Wm. Hall, Wm. Huin, Andrew Hendrix, John Johnston, Edward Johnston, Samuel 
Johnston, Thos. Jamison (S.), David Kennedy, James Kincaid, James Kirkley, Thomas 
Kirk, Wm. Kerr, Robert Kidd, George Key, Thomas Key, John Lasley, Peter Laughlin, 
John Levinston, Richard Lovell, Benjamin Lewis, Jacob Lyon, John Lyons, Wm. Long, 
Pleasant Lockhert, Archibald Lockhart, Hugh Logan, James Lewis, Edward Murray, John 
Montgomery, Francis McDermot, John Moore (S.), John McMickle, Abraham Miller (C), 
John Montgomery, Wm. Montgomery, Chas. McLockland, Edward Matthews (S.), John 
McGuire, James Mcintosh, Patrick Marr (C. and S.), John McMichaels, James McMullen, 
Patrick McClure, Wm. Merriweather, John Miller, Charles Martin, David McDonald, John 
Murphy, Thomas Murray, Thomas McClain, Wm. Munrony (S.), Sylvestor Munrony, 
Thomas McQuiddy, Thomas McDaniel, James McDonald, Elijah Martin, James McKin, 
Solomon Martin, John McKinney, John Moore, Thomas Moore, Thomas McDonald, Wm. 
Marshall, John McGann, Enock Nelson, Moses Nelson, John Nelson, John Neal, Ebenezer 
Ozburn, John Patterson, James Potter, Edward Parker, Wm. Patterson, David Pagan, 
Ebenezer Potter, Samuel Pickens, John Ross, Andrew Ryan, Lazarus Ryan, James Ramsay, 
John Robertson (S.), James Ross (S.), John Rice (S.), David Rogers (S.), Joseph Rogers, 

54 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

Larkin Rutherford, Richard Robinson, Joseph Ross (C), Benjamin Russell, Robert Randal, 
Patrick Riley, David Smith, Randal Smith, Joseph Smith, John Spencer, Wm. Shannon, 
John Stephenson (S.), Samuel Stephenson, James Thompson, James Taylor, Edward Taylor, 
Wm. Thompson, Daniel Tygard, Thomas Taylor, Robert Whitehead, Wm. Whitehead, 
Randal White, Robert White, David Wallace, Wm. Wilkerson, John Wilson, Thomas 

2 " Going out from Put-in-Bay the tenth of September, 1813, with his whole squadron, 
Perry met the British fleet in a memorable naval contest. Himself a young man of 
twenty-eight years of age, he was opposed to one of Nelson's veterans. Himself a Scotch- 
Irishman, his opponent, Captain Robert H. Barclay, was a Scotchman. The engage- 
ment was hot, but at three o'clock in the afternoon the gallant Perry saw the British flag 
hauled down. For the first time since she had created a navy, Great Britain lost an entire 
squadron. " We have met the enemy and they are ours," is the familiar line in which Perry 
announced his victory, in a despatch to General William Henry Harrison. Commodore 
Perry's mother was Sarah Wallace Alexander, a Scotch woman from the north of Ireland. 
She became the mother of five sons, all of whom were officers in the United States Navy. 
Two daughters married Captain George W. Rogers and Dr. William Butler of the United 
States Navy. Dr. Butler was the father of Senator Matthew Galbraith Butler, of South 
Carolina. After the victory at Lake Erie, some farmers in Rhode Island declared, such was 
the estimation in which they held this woman, that it was ' Mrs. Perry's victory.' " — S. S. 
Green, The Scotch-Irish in America. 

3 Theodore Roosevelt's father, bearing the same name, was of Dutch descent ; his 
mother, a native of Georgia, of Scottish. Theodore Roosevelt, Sr., married Martha Bulloch 
on December 22, 1853. Martha Bulloch's parents were Major James Stephens Bulloch and 
Martha Stewart, the latter a daughter of Daniel Stewart (an officer of the Revolution) and 
Susan Oswald. James Stephens Bulloch was a son of James and Ann Irvine Bulloch, the 
latter a daughter of Dr. John and Ann Elizabeth Baillie Irvine. James Bulloch (b. 1765 ; 
d. Feb. 9, 1806) was a son of Archibald and Mary De Veaux Bulloch, the latter a daughter 
of James De Veaux, of French Huguenot descent, and senior judge of the King's Court in 
the province of Georgia. Archibald Bulloch was president and commander-in-chief of the 
colony of Georgia, 1776-1777 ; delegate to the Continental Congress of 1775, and elected to 
the one of 1776 ; signed the first constitution of the State of Georgia as president ; and died 
in 1777. He was a son of James and Jean Stobo Bulloch, the latter a daughter of Rev. 
Archibald Stobo, who sailed from Scotland with the Darien colonists in 1698, and subse- 
quently (in 1700) settled at Charleston, S. C. James Bulloch, Sr., b. about 1701, in Scot- 
land, came from Glasgow to Charleston about 1728, where, in 1729, he married Jean Stobo. 
The Bullochs appear to belong to Baldernock, in Stirlingshire, where the name appears on 
the records for some four hundred years back. See A History and Genealogy of the Families 
of Bellinger and De Veaux, etc., by Joseph Gaston Bulloch, Savannah, 1895. 

4 John C. Calhoun was the grandson of James Calhoun, who is said to have emigrated 
from Donegal, Ireland, in 1733 {John C. Calhoun, by Dr. H. von Hoist, p. 8). John C. 
Calhoun was the son of Patrick Calhoun, whom James Parton, in his Famous Americans of 
decent Times, speaks of (pp. 117, 118) as a Scotch-Irishman, who, with Andrew Jackson and 
Andrew Johnson, other Scotch-Irishmen, illustrates well the " North of Ireland" character. 
Patrick Calhoun was a Presbyterian like his father (J. Randolph Tucker, in article "John 
Caldwell Calhoun," in Appleton's Cyclopedia of American Biography). In 1770, Patrick 
Calhoun married (von Hoist, p. 8) Martha Caldwell, who, says John S. Jenkins in his Life 
of John Caldwell Calhoun (p. 21), was a daughter of a Scotch-Irish Presbyterian, who, 
according to Tucker, was an emigrant from Ireland. 

6 Henry Clay has been classed with the Scotch-Irish by Mr. Elbert Hubbard. 
6 Lodge, Daniel Webster, p. 5 ; Curtis, Life of Daniel Webster, vol. i., p. 2. 

p- tf 




ANOTHER instance of the effect of continuous advertising by New 
England's historians of the superlative and exclusive patriotism of 
her sons may be noted in the claims so frequently made, that the Ameri- 
can people were first prepared for the idea of resistance to the arbitrary 
measures of Great Britain, and for independence, by a few of the citizens of 
Massachusetts. These claims seem first to have been given prominence by 
the discussion that arose among some of the surviving leaders of the Revo- 
lutionary period, in 1817 and 1818, upon the appearance of William Wirt's 
Life of Patrick Henry. On page 41 of that book, 1 the biographer cites 
Thomas Jefferson as saying that " Mr. Henry certainly gave the first impulse 
to the ball of the Revolution." 9 

This statement by Mr. Wirt led to several appeals being made to Mr. 
Jefferson by correspondents from New England for its verification ; and in 
answering such communications, its distinguished author uniformly dis- 
claimed any thought of the general application of his remark to the country 
at large, and very properly limited its range to the development of the Revo- 
lutionary movement within his own State. ' 

The spirit of sectional pride had been aroused, however, and an exten- 
sive epistolary discussion followed, in which some of the foremost citizens 
of the Republic took part. New England's chief advocate was John Adams, 
doubtless the original " Honest John " of American politics. With his 
natural garrulousness, he had written at great length the history of the origin 
of independence in Massachusetts, going into minute detail to show how it 
all developed from the Boston speech made by James Otis in 1761. While 
Mr. Adams's report of and commentary upon this famous argument, written 
so many years after it occurred, reminds the reader somewhat of the elo- 
quent and lengthy speeches which the Roman and mediaeval historians put 
into the mouths of warrior heroes about to engage in some great battle, there 
can be no doubt as to the general correctness of his statements regarding the 
effect of Otis's words in crystallizing public sentiment in Massachusetts and 
turning it definitely against the encroaching tendencies of Great Britain's 
commercial policy. It goes without saying, that the beginning of resist- 
ance on the part of John Adams dates from that time. His description of 
the incident, given in a letter to William Tudor, written March 29, 181 7, 
begins as follows 3 : 

The scene is the Council Chamber in the old Town House in Boston. 
The date is in the month of February, 1761. . . . 


56 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

In this chamber, round a grate fire, were seated five Judges with Lieu- 
tenant-Governor Hutchinson at their head as Chief Justice, all arrayed in 
their new fresh, rich robes of scarlet English broadcloth ; in their large 
cambric bands, and immense judicial wigs. In this chamber were seated 
at a long table all the barristers-at-law of Boston, and of the neighboring 
county of Middlesex, in gowns, bands, and tie wigs. ... In this chamber 
you have now the stage and the scenery ; next follows a narrative of the 
subject. . . . 

When the British ministry received from General Amherst his despatches 
announcing the conquest of Montreal, and the consequent annihilation of 
the French government in America, in 1759, they immediately conceived the 
design and took the resolution of conquering the English colonies, and sub- 
jecting them to the unlimited authority of Parliament. With this view and 
intention they sent orders and instructions to the collector of customs in 
Boston, Mr. Charles Paxton, to apply to the civil authority for writs of assist- 
ance, to enable the custom-house officers, tide-waiters, land-waiters, and all, 
to command all sheriffs and constables to attend and aid them in breaking 
open houses, stores, shops, cellars, ships, bales, trunks, chests, casks, pack- 
ages of all sorts, to search for goods, wares, and merchandises, which had 
been imported against the prohibition or without paying taxes imposed by 
certain acts of Parliament, called the acts of trade. . . . 

Now for the actors and performers. Mr. Gridley argued with his charac- 
teristic learning, ingenuity, and dignity. . . . Mr. Thacher followed him 
on the other side, and argued with the softness of manners, the ingenuity 
and cool reasoning, which were remarkable in his amiable character. 

But Otis was a flame of fire ! — with a promptitude of classical allusions, 
a depth of research, a rapid summary of historical dates and events, a pro- 
fusion of legal authorities, a prophetic glance of his eye into futurity, and a 
torrent of impetuous eloquence, he hurried away everything before him. 
American Independence was then and there born ; the seeds of patriots and 
heroes were then and there sown, to defend the vigorous youth, the non sine 
Diis animosus infans. Every man of a crowded audience appeared to me to 
go away, as I did, ready to take arms against Writs of Assistance. Then and 
there was the first scene of opposition to the arbitrary claims of Great 
Britain. Then and there the child Independence was born. In fifteen 
years, namely, in 1776, he grew up to manhood, and declared himself free.* 

After reading Mr. Wirt's Life of Patrick Henry y and comparing the date 
of his famous speech before the Virginia Assembly with that of James Otis's 
argument against the Writs of Assistance, Mr. Adams valiantly took up his 
pen in defence of the honor of his native State, and at once indited a notice 
of infringement to the panegyrist of the Virginia orator in this fashion * : 

I envy none of the well-merited glories of Virginia, or any of her sages 
or heroes. But, Sir, I am jealous, very jealous, of the honor of Massachu- 

The resistance to the British system for subjugating the colonies began in 
1760, and in the month of February, 1761, James Otis electrified the town of 
Boston, the province of Massachusetts Bay, and the whole continent more 
than Patrick Henry ever did in the whole course of his life. If we must 
have panegyric and hyperbole, I must say that if Mr. Henry was Demos- 
thenes and Mr. Richard Henry Lee, Cicero, James Otis was Isaiah and Eze- 
kiel united. 8 

The Birthplace of American Liberty 57 

Basing chiefly on this, and on other hasty and ill-considered statements of 
a like tenor, made at about the same time, New England's historians, as a rule, 
have since accepted as final and authoritative this claim of her foremost 
Revolutionary statesman as to the beginnings in America of resistance to the 
repressive measures of Great Britain ; and with one voice they ascribe to 
Massachusetts, and to Massachusetts alone, the inauguration of the move- 
ment which led to final independence. 

That the deliberate judgment of Adams did not confirm the drawing of 
such a broad conclusion from the statement first put forth by himself under 
the impulse of feelings aroused by wounded State pride, may be reasonably 
demonstrated by an examination of some of his later writings. 

As tending to show this more impartial attitude on the part of the 
amiable and impulsive Adams, his correspondence with Madison in the same 
year may be cited, in which some observations of the latter afford a convincing 
proof, as well of Adams's ultimately just conception as of the insufficiency 
of any view of the matter in which the range is limited to individuals. 
Madison's letter to Adams of August 7, 1818, is in part as follows 7 : 

Your remark is very just on the subject of Independence. It was not 
the offspring of a particular man or a particular moment. . . . Our 
forefathers brought with them the germ of Independence in the principle of 
self-taxation. Circumstances unfolded and perfected it. 

The first occasion which aroused this principle was, if I can trust my 
recollection, the projected union at Albany in 1754, when the proposal of 
the British Government to reimburse its advances for the colonies by a par- 
liamentary tax on them was met by the letter from Dr. Franklin to Governor 
Shirley, pointing out the unconstitutionality, the injustice, and the impolicy 
of such a tax. 

The opposition and discussions produced by the Stamp and subsequent 
Acts of Parliament, made another stage in the growth of Independence. . . . 

Franklin's letters to Governor Shirley written in December, 1754, to 
which reference is made by Madison, contain such expressions as these 8 : 

I apprehend that excluding the people of the colonies from all share 
in the choice of the grand council will give extreme dissatisfaction, as well 
as the taxing them by act of Parliament, where they have no represen- 
tation. . . . 

That it is supposed an undoubted right of Englishmen not to be taxed 
but by their own consent, given through their representatives. 

That the colonies have no representatives in Parliament. 

That to propose taxing them by Parliament, and refuse them the liberty 
of choosing a representative council to meet in the colonies and consider and 
judge of the necessity of any general tax and the quantum, shows a suspicion 
of their loyalty to the Crown, or of their regard for their country, or of their 
common sense and understanding which they have not deserved. 

In Pennsylvania, the matter of taxation had been a constant source of 
dispute between the Assembly and the Proprietary government for many 
years prior to 1760. In that State, more than ten years before the battle of 

58 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

Lexington, an armed uprising took place on the part of the Scotch-Irish 
against the principle of taxation without representation or protection. 

The inciting causes of this hostile demonstration against the provincial 
government of Pennsylvania grew out of the continued and studied neglect, 
by the Quaker oligarchy then controlling the Pennsylvania Assembly, of that 
primary essential of all organized governments, namely, the ability and dis- 
position to defend its citizens against the murderous invasions of an armed 
foe. The Quaker government not only failed to furnish protection to its 
citizens, but made a virtue of its own shortcomings in that respect. 

Along the thinly settled borders, in 1762-63, two thousand persons had 
been killed or carried off, and nearly an equal number of families driven 
from their homes. " The frontier people of Pennsylvania," says Parkman, 
" goaded to desperation by long-continued suffering, were divided between 
rage against the Indians, and resentment against the Quakers, who had 
yielded them cold sympathy and inefficient aid. The horror and fear, grief 
and fury, with which these men looked upon the mangled remains of friends 
and relatives, set language at defiance." On one occasion, the frontiersmen 
sent to Philadelphia a wagon laden with the mangled corpses of their friends 
and relatives, who had fallen by Indian butchery. These were carried along 
the streets, with many people following, cursing the Indians, and also the 
Quakers because they would not join in war for the destruction of the sav- 
ages. But the hideous spectacle failed of the intended effect, and the As- 
sembly still turned a deaf ear to all entreaties for more effective aid. The 
Scotch- Irish of the frontier were the chief sufferers from the depredations 
of the Indians. They were of a rude and hardy stamp, — hunters, scouts, 
rangers, Indian traders, and backwoods farmers, — who had grown up with 
arms in their hands, and been trained under all the influences of the war- 
like frontier. They fiercely complained that they were interposed as a 
barrier between the rest of the province and a ferocious enemy, and that 
they were sacrificed to the safety of men who looked with indifference on 
their miseries, and lost no opportunity to extenuate and smooth away the 
cruelties of their destroyers. 

Along the western frontiers of Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia, in 
the summer of 1763, terror reigned supreme. Indian scalping parties were 
ranging everywhere, laying waste the settlements, destroying the harvests, 
and butchering men, women, and children, with ruthless fury. Many hun- 
dreds of wretched fugitives flocked for refuge to Carlisle and the other 
towns of the border, bringing tales of inconceivable horror. Strong parties 
of armed men, who went out to reconnoitre the country, found every habi- 
tation reduced to cinders, and the half-burned bodies of the inmates lying 
among the smouldering ruins ; while here and there was seen some miserable 
wretch, scalped and tomahawked, but still alive and conscious. As the 
summer passed, the frontiers of Cumberland County were completely aban- 
doned by the Scotch-Irish settlers, many of whom, not content with seeking. 

The Birthplace of American Liberty 59 

refuge at Carlisle, continued their flight to the eastward, and pushed on to 
Lancaster and Philadelphia. Carlisle presented a most deplorable spectacle. 
A multitude of the refugees, unable to find shelter in the town, had en- 
camped in the woods, or on the adjacent fields, erecting huts of branches 
and bark, and living on such charity as the slender means of the towns- 
people could supply. The following is an extract from a letter dated at 
Carlisle, July 5, 1763 (Hazard's Pennsylvania Register, iv., 390) : 

Nothing could exceed the terror which prevailed from house to house, 
from town to town. The road was near covered with women and children 
flying to Lancaster and Philadelphia. The pastor of the Episcopal Church 
went at the head of his congregation, to protect and encourage them on the 
way. A few retired to the breastworks for safety. The alarm once given 
could not be appeased. 

The letter from which the following extract is taken appears in the 
Pennsylvania Gazette, No. 1804, the letter being dated at Carlisle, July 12, 

I embrace this first leisure since yesterday morning to transmit you a 
brief account of our present state of affairs here, which indeed is very dis- 
tressing ; every day, almost, affording some fresh object to awaken the compas- 
sion, alarm the fears, or kindle into resentment and vengeance every sensible 
breast, while flying families, obliged to abandon house and possessions, to 
save their lives by an hasty escape ; mourning widows, bewailing their hus- 
bands surprised and massacred by savage rage ; tender parents, lamenting 
the fruits of their own bodies, cropt in the very bloom of youth by a barbar- 
ous hand ; with relations and acquaintances pouring out sorrow for murdered 
neighbors and friends, present a varied scene of mingled distress. 

To-day a British vengeance begins to arise in the breasts of our men. 
One of them that fell from among the twelve, as he was just expiring, said 
to one of his fellows, " Here, take my gun, and kill the first Indian you see, 
and all shall be well." 

In October, 1763, several companies of Rangers were formed by the 
Scotch-Irish in Lancaster and Cumberland counties, for the purpose of 
patrolling the borders and giving such protection as they were able to the 
scattered inhabitants. One of these companies, starting from Paxtang in 
Lancaster County, marched to the relief of the Connecticut settlers at Wyo- 
ming, but arrived two days after that settlement had been burned, and its 
inhabitants killed, imprisoned, or driven off by the Indians. They buried 
the dead bodies of those who had fallen in the massacre, and returned to 
the southern settlements. The Quakers, who seemed resolved that they 
would neither defend the people of the frontier nor allow them to defend 
themselves, vehemently inveighed against the several expeditions up the 
Susquehanna, and denounced them as seditious and murderous. " Urged 
by their blind prejudice in favor of the Indians," says Parkman, "they 
insisted that the bands of the Upper Susquehanna were friendly to the Eng- 
lish ; whereas, with the single exception of a few Moravian converts near 
Wyoming, who had not been molested by the whites, there could be no 

60 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

rational doubt that these savages nourished a rancorous and malignant 
hatred against the province. But the Quakers, removed by their situation 
from all fear of the tomahawk, securely vented their spite against the bor- 
derers, and doggedly closed their ears to the truth." Meanwhile, the people 
of the frontier besieged the Assembly with petitions for relief ; but little 
heed was given to their complaints. 

At this time, the provincial government had the custody of some twenty 
Iroquois Indians, who were seated on Conestoga Manor, in Lancaster County, 
not far from the Susquehanna. The men spent part of their time in hunting, 
and lounged away the rest of it in idleness and dissipation. They lived by 
beggary, and the sale of brooms, baskets, and wooden ladles, made by the 
women. In the immediate vicinity they were commonly regarded as vaga- 
bonds, but in the neighboring settlements they were looked upon as secretly 
abetting the enemy, acting as spies, giving shelter to scalping parties, and 
aiding them in their depredations. Their chief had repeatedly threatened 
to kill various white men and women of the neighborhood. 

About the middle of December, word was brought to the settlers living 
at Paxtang (now Harrisburg), that an Indian, known to have committed 
depredations in the vicinity, had been traced to Conestoga. Matthew Smith, 
a man of influence and popularity among his associates, called together a 
number of the Paxtang Rangers, and led them to the Conestoga settlement. 
One of the men saw an Indian issuing from a house, and thought that he 
recognized him as the savage who had killed his own mother. Firing 
his rifle, he brought the Indian down. Then, with a loud shout, the furious 
mob rushed into the cabins, and killed all the Indians whom they found 
there, some six in number. Fourteen of the Conestogas managed to escape, 
and, fleeing to Lancaster, were given a place of refuge in the county jail. 
While there, word was again carried to the Paxtang men that an Indian, 
known to have murdered the relatives of one of their number, was among 
those who had received the protection of the Lancaster magistrates. This 
again aroused a feeling of rage and resentment amongst the Rangers. On 
December 27th some fifty of them, under the leadership of Lazarus Stewart, 
marched to Lancaster, broke open the jail, and with the fury of a mob 
massacred every Indian contained therein, man, woman, and child. 

This is said by some to have been the first instance of the operation of 
lynch law in America ; and many blame the Scotch-Irish for its introduction. 
Doubtless the odium is merited ; as a similar incident occurred nearly 
twenty years later, when some of the Scotch-Irish of Washington County, 
Pennsylvania, under far less extenuating circumstances, murdered in cold 
blood upwards of ninety men, women, and children of the community of 
Moravian Indians at Gnadenhutten, west of the Ohio. This atavistic ten- 
dency is further illustrated in our own day by the lynching of negroes in 
the South, the frequency of which is probably due to the fact that the 
southern white population is chiefly of Scotch-Irish descent ; these examples 

The Birthplace of American Liberty 61 

of perverted administration of justice finding many parallels in the annals 
of mediaeval Scotland. The family feuds of Kentucky, which for the most 
part seem peculiar to families bearing Scottish names, may also be cited as 
examples and counterparts in America of the clan and family feuds formerly 
so common in Scotland. The case of the Regulators of North Carolina is 
another well-known instance in American history of the Scotch-Irish back- 
woodsmen taking the administration of justice into their own hands, when 
their rulers had failed to provide for them a safe government. 

But the uprising of the " Paxtang Boys " was more than that of a mere 
lynching mob, bent on the immediate extermination of all redskins who 
came within its reach. It was a protest, bloody and atrocious, it is true, 
made by the harassed frontiersmen against the cowardly policy of the 
Quaker government. The Scotch-Irish had suffered grievously from the 
Indian outrages, caused in a great measure by the neglect of that government 
to provide adequately for the defence of the province. They had repeatedly 
appealed to the Assembly, and their petitions for help had been rejected 
with contempt. They were unable to bring about a change for the better, as 
all the political power was in the hands of a small number of people. They 
determined finally to appeal to force, and, in doing so, thought in their first 
blind rage that they might strike a blow at the Quakers, and at the same 
time rid themselves of probable enemies, by killing the Quakers' wards. The 
Assembly, they argued, had shown infinitely more consideration for the 
feelings of the Indians than it had for the wounds of the Scotch-Irish. It 
had voted the savages large sums of money as presents, and indirectly en- 
abled them to carry on an exterminating warfare against the whites ; while 
at the same time it refused to make any proper defence of the province 
against the marauders. If the Quakers were unmoved by the killing of 
hundreds of their Scotch-Irish fellow citizens, whom they hated, perhaps 
they could be made to realize the condition of the frontiers by the killing of 
their own Indian wards, whom they loved and cherished. 

The Paxtang Rangers, in their bitter resentment against the government, 
lost sight of the fact that it is better for twenty guilty men to escape than 
for one innocent man to suffer. Their own miseries made them believe in 
all sincerity that the only good Indian is a dead one ; and that they them- 
selves were the agents appointed of Providence to make all Indians good. 

The Reverend John Elder was captain of the Paxtang Rangers, and 
minister of Paxtang and Derry congregations, from which the Rangers were 
enlisted. He tried in vain to dissuade his men from going to Conestoga on 
their bloody errand, and desisted only after they had broken away from him 
in anger. On the 27th December, 1763, the reverend captain wrote to 
Governor Penn as follows : 

The storm which had been so long gathering, has at length exploded. 
Had Government removed the Indians from Conestoga, as was frequently 
urged without success, this painful catastrophe might have been avoided. 

62 ^ The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

What could I do with men heated to madness ? All that I could do was 
done. I expostulated, but life and reason were set at defiance, and yet 
the men, in private life, were virtuous and respectable — not cruel, but 
mild and merciful. . . . The time will arrive when each palliating cir- 
cumstance will be calmly weighed. This deed, magnified into the blackest 
of crimes, shall be considered one of those youthful ebullitions of wrath 
caused by momentary excitement, to which human infirmity is subjected. 

The different proclamations of Governor Penn, and the action of the 
Assembly relative to this transaction, created intense excitement on the 
frontiers of Lancaster, Berks, and Northampton counties, and meetings were 
held at which the provincial authorities were severely condemned. Repre- 
sentatives were appointed to proceed to Philadelphia and demand redress 
and protection. Accompanying them were large delegations from the 
"back inhabitants." 

The approach of the frontiersmen caused great uneasiness in Philadel- 
phia. Their force was magnified by rumor to many thousands. Six com- 
panies of foot, one of artillery, and two troops of horse were formed to 
oppose them : and some thousands of the inhabitants, including many 
Quakers, were prepared to render assistance, in case an attempt should be 
made upon the town. The barracks, which were under the protection of the 
regular troops, were fortified, several works being thrown up about them, 
and eight pieces of cannon mounted. 

On arriving at Germantown, the Paxtang men were met by commission- 
ers to whom they made known their grievances. Colonel Matthew Smith 
and James Gibson then accompanied the commissioners to Philadelphia, 
where they met the Governor and the Assembly, and presented their de- 
mands. In the meantime, with few exceptions, the frontiersmen who accom^ 
panied them returned home. 

The memorial of Gibson and Smith was sustained by a " Declaration " 
bearing fifteen hundred signatures. 

In a letter written at this time, Governor Penn says : " We expect a 
thousand of back inhabitants in town, to insist upon the Assembly granting 
their request with regard to the increase of representatives, to put them upon an 
equality with the rest of the counties. They have from time to time presented 
several petitions for the purpose, which have been always disregarded by 
the House ; for which purpose they intend to come in person. I am of 
opinion they [the Assembly] will never come into [agreement], as it will 
be the means of lessening the power of the governing few in this Province." 

The petition presented by these Scotch-Irish citizens, in enumerating 
their grievances, mentions as the chief one the fact that they were not 
permitted a proportionate share in the government of the province. This 
petition is printed in full in the Colonial Records of Pennsylvania, vol. ix., pp. 
138-145, and its principal contents are as follows : 

We, Matthew Smith and James Gibson, in behalf of ourselves and his 

The Birthplace of American Liberty 63 

Majesty's faithful and loyal subjects, the inhabitants of the frontier counties 
of Lancaster, York, Cumberland, Berks, and Northampton, humbly beg 
leave to remonstrate and lay before you the following grievances, which we 
submit to your wisdom for redress. 

First, We apprehend that, as freemen and English subjects, we have an 
indisputable title to the same privileges and immunities with his Majesty's 
other subjects who reside in the interior counties of Philadelphia, Chester, 
and Bucks, and therefore ought not to be excluded from an equal share 
with them in the very important privilege of legislation : nevertheless, con- 
trary to the Proprietor's charter, and the acknowledged principles of com- 
mon justice and equity, our five counties are restrained from electing more 
than ten representatives, viz., four for Lancaster, two for York, two for 
Cumberland, one for Berks, and one for Northampton, while the three coun- 
ties and city of Philadelphia, Chester, and Bucks elect twenty-six. This 
we humbly conceive is oppressive, unequal, and unjust, the cause of many 
of our grievances, and an infringement of our natural privileges of freedom 
and equality ; wherefore, we humbly pray that we may no longer be 
deprived of an equal number with the three aforesaid counties, to represent 
us in Assembly." 

Secondly, We understand that a bill is now before the House of As- 
sembly, wherein it is provided that such persons as shall be charged with 
killing any Indians in Lancaster county, shall not be tried in the county 
where the fact was committed, but in the counties of Philadelphia, Chester, 
or Bucks. This is manifestly to deprive British subjects of their known 
privileges, to cast an eternal reproach upon whole counties, as if they were 
unfit to serve their country in the quality of jurymen, and to contradict the 
well-known laws of the British nation in a point whereon life, liberty, and 
security essentially depend, namely, that of being tried by their equals, in 
the neighborhood where their own, their accusers, and the witnesses' char- 
acter and credit, with the circumstances of the fact are best known, and 
instead thereof putting their lives in the hands of strangers, who may as 
justly be suspected of partiality to as the frontier counties can be of preju- 
dices against Indians. . . . 

Thirdly, During the late and present Indian War, the frontiers of this 
Province have been repeatedly attacked and ravaged by skulking parties of 
the Indians, who have with the most savage cruelty murdered men, women, 
and children, without distinction, and have reduced near a thousand fam- 
ilies to the most extreme distress. It grieves us to the very heart to see 
such of our frontier inhabitants as have escaped savage fury with the loss of 
their parents, their children, their wives, or relatives, left destitute by the 
public, and exposed to the most cruel poverty and wretchedness, while 
upwards of an hundred and twenty of these savages, who are with great 
reason suspected of being guilty of these horrid barbarities, under the mask 
of friendship, have procured themselves to be taken under the protection of 
the Government with a view to elude the fury of the brave relatives of the 
murdered, and are now maintained at the public expense. Some of these 
Indians, now in the Barracks at Philadelphia, are confessedly a part of the 
Wyalusing Indians, which tribe is now at war with us, and the others are the 
Moravian Indians, who, living with us under the cloak of friendship, carried 
on a correspondence with our known enemies on the Great Island. We 
cannot but observe, with sorrow and indignation, that some persons in this 
Province are at pains to extenuate the barbarous cruelties practised by these 
savages on our murdered brethren and relatives, which are shocking to 

64 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

human nature, and must pierce every heart but that of the hardened perpe- 
trators or their abettors ; nor is it less distressing to hear others pleading 
that although the Wyalusing tribe is at war with us, yet that part of it which 
is under the protection of the Government, may be friendly to the English, 
and innocent. In what nation under the sun was it ever the custom that 
when a neighboring nation took up arms, not an individual should be 
touched but only the persons that offered hostilities ? Who ever proclaimed 
war with a part of a nation, and not with the whole ? Had these Indians 
disapproved of the perfidy of their tribe, and been willing to cultivate and 
preserve friendship with us, why did they not give notice of the war before 
it happened, as it is known to be the result of long deliberations, and a pre- 
concerted combination among them ? Why did they not leave their tribe 
immediately, and come among us before there was ground to suspect them, 
or war was actually waged with their tribe ? No, they stayed amongst 
them, were privy to their murders and ravages, until we had destroyed 
their provisions, and when they could no longer subsist at home, they come, 
not as deserters but as friends, to be maintained through the winter, that 
they may be able to scalp and butcher us in the spring. 

And as to the Moravian Indians, there are strong grounds at least to 
suspect their friendship, as it is known that they carried on a correspond- 
ence with our enemies on the Great Island. We killed three Indians going 
from Bethlehem to the Great Island with blankets, ammunition, and pro- 
visions, which is an undeniable proof that the Moravian Indians were in 
confederacy with our open enemies ; and we cannot but be filled with 
indignation to hear this action of ours painted in the most odious and 
detestable colors, as if we had inhumanly murdered our guides, who pre- 
served us from perishing in the woods, when we only killed three of our 
known enemies, who attempted to shoot us when we surprised them. And, 
besides all this, we understand that one of these very Indians is proved, by 
the oath of Stinson's widow, to be the very person that murdered her hus- 
band. How, then, comes it to pass, that he alone, of all the Moravian 
Indians, should join the enemy to murder that family ? Or can it be sup- 
posed that any enemy Indians, contrary to their known custom of making 
war, should penetrate into the heart of a settled country to burn, plunder, 
and murder the inhabitants, and not molest any houses in their return, or 
ever be seen or heard of ? Or how can we account for it, that no ravages 
have been committed in Northampton county since the removal of the 
Moravian Indians, when the Great Cove has been struck since ? These 
things put it beyond doubt with us that the Indians now at Philadelphia are 
his Majesty's perfidious enemies, and, therefore, to protect and maintain 
them at the public expense, while our suffering brethren on the frontiers 
are almost destitute of the necessaries of life, and are neglected by the pub- 
lic, is sufficient to make us mad with rage, and tempt us to do what nothing 
but the most violent necessity can vindicate. We humbly and earnestly 
pray, therefore, that those enemies of his Majesty may be removed as soon 
as possible out of the Province. 

Fourthly ', We humbly conceive that it is contrary to the maxims of good 
policy, and extremely dangerous to our frontiers, to suffer any Indians, of 
what tribe soever, to live within the inhabited parts of this Province while 
we are engaged in an Indian war, as experience has taught us that they are 
all perfidious, and their claim to freedom and independency puts it in their 
power to act as spies, to entertain and give intelligence to our enemies, and 
to furnish them with provisions and warlike stores. To this fatal intercourse 

The Birthplace of American Liberty 65 

between our pretended friends and open enemies, we must ascribe the 
greatest part of the ravages and murders that have been committed in the 
course of this and the last Indian war. We therefore pray that this griev- 
ance be taken under consideration and remedied. 

Fifthly, We cannot help lamenting that no provision has been hitherto 
made, that such of our frontier inhabitants as have been wounded in defence 
of the Province, their lives and liberties, may be taken care of, and cured of 
their wounds at the public expense. We therefore pray that this grievance 
may be redressed. 

Sixthly, In the late Indian war, this Province, with others of his Majesty's 
colonies, gave rewards for Indian scalps, to encourage the seeking them in 
their own country, as the most likely means of destroying or reducing them 
to reason, but no such encouragement has been given in this war, which has 
damped the spirits of many brave men, who are willing to venture their lives 
in parties against the enemy. We therefore pray that public rewards may 
be proposed for Indian scalps, which may be adequate to the dangers 
attending enterprises of this nature. 

Seventhly, We daily lament that numbers of our nearest and dearest 
relatives are still in captivity among the savage heathen, to be trained up in 
all their ignorance and barbarity, or to be tortured to death with all the 
contrivances of Indian cruelty, for attempting to make their escape from 
bondage ; we see they pay no regard to the many solemn promises they have 
made to restore our friends who are in bondage amongst them. We 
therefore earnestly pray that no trade may hereafter be permitted to be 
carried on with them until our brethren and relatives are brought home 
to us. 

Eighthly, We complain that a certain society of people in this Province 
[meaning the Quakers] in the late Indian war, and at several treaties held by 
the King's representatives, openly loaded the Indians with presents, and that 
I[srael] P[emberton], a leader of the said society, in defiance of all government, 
not only abetted our Indian enemies, but kept up a private intelligence with 
them, and publicly received from them a belt of wampum, as if he had been 
our Governor, or authorized by the King to treat with his enemies. By this 
means, the Indians have been taught to despise us as a weak and disunited 
people, and from this fatal source have arose many of our calamities under 
which we groan. We humbly pray, therefore, that this grievance may be 
redressed, and that no private subject be hereafter permitted to treat with, 
or carry on a correspondence with, our enemies. 

Ninthly, we cannot but observe with sorrow, that Fort Augusta, which 
has been very expensive to this Province, has afforded us but little assistance 
during this or the last war. The men that were stationed at that place 
neither helped our distressed inhabitants to save their crops, nor did they 
attack our enemies in their towns, or patrol on our frontiers. We humbly 
request that proper measures may be taken to make that garrison more 
serviceable to us in our distress, if it can be done. 

N. B. We are far from intending any reflection against the commanding 
officer stationed at Augusta, as we presume his conduct was always directed 
by those from whom he received his orders. 

Signed on behalf of ourselves, and by appointment of a great number of 
the frontier inhabitants. 
February 13th, 1764. 

Matthew Smith, 
James Gibson. ,0 

66 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

No action on the two memorials was taken by the Assembly, but a bill 
was passed granting supplies for the ensuing campaign ; and the consequent 
military preparations, together with a threatened renewal of the war on the 
part of the Indians, engrossed the minds of the frontier people, and caused 
the excitements of the winter to be forgotten. 

The nature of some earlier conflicts between the Assembly and the State 
Government of Pennsylvania is thus alluded to by Franklin in chapter nine 
of his Autobiography : 

These public quarrels were all at bottom owing to the Proprietaries, our 
hereditary governors ; who, when any expense was to be incurred for the 
defence of their province, with incredible meanness instructed their deputies 
to pass no act for levying the necessary taxes, unless their vast estates were 
in the same act expressly exonerated ; and they had even taken the bonds 
of these deputies to observe such instructions. . . . The Assemblies for 
three years held out against this injustice, though constrained to bend at 

The significance of the contest between the Assembly and the Proprietary 
may be inferred from a perusal of the message sent to the Assembly by Gov- 
ernor Morris, May 16, 1755, which charges some of its members, among other 
things, with a desire for independence" This portion of the message may 
well be reproduced in connection with the present consideration of its sub- 
ject. It is to be found in volume vi. of the Colonial Records of Pennsylvania, 
at pp. 386, 387 : 

Gentlemen : 

When I summoned You together on the Seventeenth of March last I 
was in Hopes You would bring with you Inclinations to promote the Publick 
Service by Granting the Supplies expected by the Crown and by putting 
this Province into a Posture of Defence ; but I am sorry to find that neither 
the Danger to which this Country stands exposed, nor his Majesty's repeated 
and affectionate calls, have had any Weight with You. 

The Bill you sent me for striking Twenty-Five Thousand Pounds was of 
a more extraordinary Nature than that I refused my Assent to in the Winter 
Sessions, as it gave General Braddock a Power over no more than Five 
Thousand Pounds, and subjected the remaining Twenty Thousand and all 
the Surplus of the Excise for Eleven Years to come to the Disposition of 
some of the Members of your House, and to the Assembly for the Time 

The offering Money in a Way and upon Terms that You very well 
knew I could not consistent with my Duty to the Crown consent to, is in my 
Opinion trifling with the King's Commands, and amounts to a Refusal to give 
at all, and I am satisfied will be seen in this Light by my Superiors, who by 
your Bill above mentioned, which I shall lay before them, and by the whole 
of your Conduct since You have been made acquainted with the designs of 
the French, will be convinced that your Resolutions are and have been to 
take Advantage of your Country's Danger, to aggrandize and render perma- 
nent your own Power and Authority, and to destroy that of the Crown. 
That it is for this Purpose and to promote your Scheme of future Independency 
You are grasping at the Disposition of all Publick Money and at the Power 

The Birthplace of American Liberty 67 

of filling all the offices of Government especially those of the Revenue, and 
when his Majesty and the Nation are at the Expense of sending Troops for 
the Protection of these Colonies, You refuse to furnish them with Provisions 
and necessary Carriages tho' your country is full of both, unless You can at 
the same Time encroach upon the Rights of the Crown and increase your 
own Power, already too great for a Branch of a Subordinate dependant 
Government so remote from the principal Seat of Power. 

In an address delivered before the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, 
in 1882, upon " Pennsylvania's Formative Influence upon Federal 
Institutions," Mr. William A. Wallace presented some facts which may well 
be given a place in connection with the subject of taxation without repre- 
sentation : 

The earliest instance that I can find in which the issue of no taxation 
without representation was sharply defined in America was that of 1740, 
between the city of Philadelphia and the Provincial Assembly. The city 
corporation, consisting of the mayor and common council, possessed exten- 
sive powers of taxation, and it was proposed to take them away and vest 
them in commissioners and assessors, to be elected by the people. A bill 
for that purpose was passed by the Assembly, but the Governor refused to 
sign it. The quarrel was really between the proprietary party and the people. 
The city corporation was a close body, originally composed of persons nom- 
inated by William Penn, and keeping up succession by the election of 
councilmen and aldermen by those already in office, so that the policy of 
the corporation guarded from the interference of persons whose views might 
have differed from the councilmen. In the controversy the Assembly struck 
the key-note which sounded thirty-six years afterward in the Declaration of 
Independence. The ground was taken that as the inhabitants of the city 
had no right to choose members of the city corporation, the latter should 
not have the power of taxing the people without their own consent ; that 
the King claimed no power of levying taxes without the consent of Parlia- 
ment, and that there should be no taxation without representation. 12 

This action was twenty-five years before the resolutions of the House of 
Burgesses of Virginia, introduced by Patrick Henry, were passed, and, 
whilst it may be true, as Mr. Jefferson states, that Mr. Henry certainly 
gave the " first impulse to the ball of the Revolution " by these resolutions, 
yet the people of the colonies were familiar with the controversies in Penn- 
sylvania, and these and the teachings of Franklin prepared the public mind 
for its final attitude of resistance to the death. Mr. Graham, in his history 
of the colonies, says that when in the beginning of 1764, Lord Granville in- 
formed the colonies of his purpose to procure an Act of Parliament, im- 
posing a stamp duty on the colonies, which ultimately was carried into 
execution, and aroused the patriotic fervor and indignation of all of the 
people, the Pennsylvania Assembly " was distinguished above all others by 
the temperate, firm, dignified, and consistent strain of its debates and pro- 
ceedings." It was declared there that this proposition was a deviation from 
national usage, unconstitutional, unjust, and unnecessary, and that Parlia- 
ment had no right to tax the colonies at all. They recognized the right of 
the Crown to ask for supplies, and expressed their willingness to grant 
them, but utterly denied the power and authority of the ministers and 
Parliament to tax them. Virginia and New York also gave positive con- 
tradiction to this claim of right to tax the colonies, and affirmed its 

68 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

unconstitutionality. Differing from Pennsylvania in her dignified silence, 
they sent petitions to both King and Parliament, but that of Virginia weakened 
its force by distinguishing between the power and the right to tax, for, while 
denying the right, the exertion of the supposed power was deprecated in a 
manner which indicated that no opposition beyond remonstrance was in- 
tended. They denied the right, recognized the power, and breathed not a 
syllable that implied either the power or the will to resist the infliction. The 
petition of New York was not presented. No member of Parliament was 
found willing to present it, and it reached England after the Stamp Act was 
in progress. 

Massachusetts, on the contrary, amid her divided councils, not only did 
not boldly stand against the right to tax, but addressed the House of Com- 
mons by a petition imploring for favor. The practical effect was to sanction 
the pretensions of Parliament to enforce its right to enact and execute the 
Stamp Act, and to place the hope of the colonies upon the lenity and indul- 
gence of the British Government. The bold and unhesitating declaration 
announced in our Assembly under the lead of Dickinson and Franklin 
against the right, and the denial of the power by its record, was followed 
by no other of the colonies, but Franklin in advocating the doctrine thus 
laid down, in his controversy with British authority, as our representative, 
quoted Philip De Comines and the famous declaration : " There is neither 
King nor sovereign lord on earth, who has beyond his own domain power 
to lay the imposition of one farthing on his subjects, without the consent of 
those who pay it, unless he does it by tyranny and violence." Here, as in 
other things, we find Pennsylvania and her sons in the advance, and this, 
too, in face of the fact that the charter to Penn at least impliedly recognized 
the right of Parliament to tax. When this first step in the oppressive 
statutes of the mother country, which ultimately brought armed resistance 
and independence, was taken, and the Stamp Act was a fixed fact, Virginia, 
under the fiery lead of Henry, declared through a small majority of its 
House of Burgesses that " the most substantial and distinguished part of 
their political birthright was the privilege of being taxed exclusively by 
themselves, or their representatives," and thus primarily voiced the uni- 
versal thought. Massachusetts, following Otis, Adams, and Hancock, at the 
same hour initiated her call for a convention of the colonies for unity and 
resistance. Our Assembly with unanimous voice placed upon record their 
protest, that " the only legal representatives of the people were the persons 
elected to serve as members of the Assembly, and that the taxation of the 
Province by any other persons whatsoever was unconstitutional, unjust, 
subversive of liberty, and destructive of happiness." 

The firm and decided attitude of the colonies, and the representations 
and genius of Franklin, then the agent of Pennsylvania at London, so pre- 
vailed upon Pitt and those in power, that the Stamp Act was repealed 
within two years from its enactment, and the opening of the bloody drama 
of the Revolution was postponed for further contests between prerogative 
and arbitrary power on the one hand, and patriotic independence and per- 
sonal right on the other. They soon came, and in them we trace the spirit 
of feudal control combating the rights of the individual, which, since the 
foundation of the colony, had been struggling for the mastery. 

The Birthplace of American Liberty 69 


! P. 59, 25th edition. 

8 In his conversation with Webster in 1824, Jefferson pronounced a further eulogy on 
the character of Patrick Henry in these words: "It is not now easy to say what we 
should have done without Patrick Henry. He was far before all in maintaining the spirit of 
the Revolution. His influence was most extensive with the members from the upper 
counties ; and his boldness and their votes overawed and controlled the more timid and 
aristocratic gentlemen of the lower part of the State. . . . After all, it must be allowed 
that he was our leader in the measures of the Revolution in Virginia, and in that respect 
more is due to him than to any other person. If we had not had him we should have got 
on pretty well as you did by a number of men of nearly equal talents but he left all of us 
far behind." — Curtis, Life of Daniel Webster, vol. i., p. 585. 

3 Works, vol. x., pp. 244, 245, 247. 

4 See, also, Works of John Adams, vol. x., pp. 274, 277, 279, 280, 282, 289, 292, 298, 
314, 317, 320. 

5 Works, vol. x., p. 272. 

6 The influence of this controversy [over the Writs of Assistance in 1761] in producing 
the Revolution, is not wholly due to the fiery eloquence of Otis, whose words, said John 
Adams, "breathed into the nation the breath of life," nor to the range of his argument 
. . . but to their effect upon th*e commercial interest — then the leading one — of New 
England ; for if the latent powers of these writs were set free and used by the revenue 
officers, the commerce of Boston, Salem, and Newport would have been effectually 
crippled. — Narrative and Critical History of America, vol. vi., pp. II, 12. Mellen 
Chamberlain, The Revolution Impending. 

In the debate in the Commons on the Boston Port Bill and the infraction of the charter 
of Massachusetts, Sir Richard Sutton said that "even in the most quiet times the disposi- 
tion to oppose the laws of this country was strongly ingrafted in the Americans, and all 
their actions conveyed a spirit and wish for independence. If you ask an American who is 
his master, he will tell you he has none, nor any governor but Jesus Christ." {Adolphus, ii., 
108) — N. and C. Hist., vi., p. 232, note. 

I Life and Writings of "fames Madison, vol. iii., p. 105. 

8 See Franklin's Works, vol. ii., pp. 376, 377 ; and for the whole history of his plan of 
union and its attendant circumstances, ibid., pp. 343 to 387, and his Autobiography, ch. ix. 

9 The number of taxables in Lancaster, Cumberland, York, Northampton, and Berks 
counties in 1760 was 15,437, and in Bucks, Chester, and Philadelphia, 16,230. 

10 See Parkman, Conspiracy of Pontiac, ch. xxv., and his Appendix E. 

II On this subject see also Appendix E (Examination of Joseph Galloway). 

12 See Colonial Records of Pennsylvania, vol. iv., pp. 375-420. The principle is laid 
down in a message from the Assembly to the Governor in May, 1740, as follows (p. 408) : 
" Nor would any part of the bill, if passed into a law, debar them from levying money on 
the inhabitants to these purposes, if they were authorized by their charter so to do, altho' 
in our opinion, it ought not nor cannot give any such power, for the following reasons : 
I. The members of the corporation were originally named by the Proprietor, and have 
since chosen their successors ; and as the inhabitants of the city have not any right to chuse 
them, it is not reasonable they should have the power of levying money on the inhabitants 
without their consent. 2. The King himself claims no power of laying and levying taxes 
on his subjects but by common consent in Parliament ; and as all the powers of government 
in this province are derived under him, they cannot be greater in this respect than those from 
which they are derived," etc. 



WE have now cited some authentic instances of vigorous and prolonged 
resistance to the monarchical principle of taxing the many for the 
benefit of the few, as well as the promulgation of the doctrine of no taxation 
without representation, all of which occurred many years before the passage 
of the Stamp Act. We have also had the example of an armed demonstration 
on the part of the Scotch-Irish of Pennsylvania in opposition to the first- 
named principle, at a time when the Massachusetts Independence " infant " 
was yet in its swaddling clothes. 

Nor are these all. The early pages of American colonial history contain 
numerous like instances of resistance to arbitrary power ever since the time 
of the first great outbreak of the American spirit in opposition to old- 
world traditions and oppressions which took place in 1676 in the revolt of 
the English Nathaniel Bacon and the Scottish William Drummond and their 
followers against the royal government as then administered by Governor 
Berkeley in Virginia. 

Let us now consider another of these vital principles of human liberty, 
one in the development of which Americans boast themselves as being fore- 
most among the nations of the world, — that is, liberty of speech and the 
freedom of the press. 

This principle was, perhaps, first effectively contended for and success- 
fully established in the hearts of the American public twenty-six years be- 
fore James Otis's speech at Boston, in the trial of John Peter Zenger, a printer 
of New York, and it was then done chiefly by the eloquence and per- 
sistence of the Scottish Attorney-General of Pennsylvania, a man named 
Andrew Hamilton, who was aided by two Presbyterian lawyers of New York, 
James Alexander and William Smith. Hamilton was the chief actor in this 
affair, which has been cited by Gouverneur Morris as the beginning of Amer- 
ican liberty, and no early moulder of public opinion on the questions involved 
in that struggle deserves a higher place in the affections of the American 
people than this Scotch attorney, the first " Philadelphia lawyer " to give 
that appellation international renown. 1 

The occasion of his appearance was a memorable one, and the incident is 
not unlike that narrated by John Adams in telling of the argument over the 
Writs of Assistance in Massachusetts; the scene in this case being the highest 
court of the neighboring colony of New York, and the leading actors the chief 
justice and attorney-general of that province with the aged and fearless lawyer 
from the Quaker colony. Its action took place on August 4, 1735, and the 


Liberty of Speech and Conscience 71 

incident is narrated at length in a pamphlet issued soon afterwards by two of 
the defendant's attorneys. Zenger's defence was undertaken by the Presby- 
terian Junta, which later became so famous in the Revolutionary history of 
New York. 8 

Zenger was the publisher of the New York Journal, and had printed in 
its columns some strictures on William Cosby, the royal governor of the 
province. These criticisms were for the most part true, and for that 
reason very unpalatable to their subject. As a warning to others, as much 
as for his own offences, Zenger was arrested. It was proposed to deal sum- 
marily with the prisoner, but public interest was aroused in his case, and it 
was seen that if he was convicted all hope of free speech would for the time 
be gone. As the public became interested, the authorities became de- 
termined and harsh. In pursuance of his rights, Zenger's counsel made an 
objection to the judges who were to try the case, and they were promptly 
disbarred, while a lawyer was assigned by the Court to carry on the defence. 
When Zenger was finally called on to face a jury, the authorities were confi- 
dent of making short work of his case, and of establishing a precedent which 
would crush out in the future what they termed " sedition." Through the 
instrumentality of James Alexander and William Smith, who were the chief 
spirits in a society known as the " Sons of Liberty," Andrew Hamilton was 
induced to appear as counsel for the prisoner. The fame of this venerable 
attorney, his standing at the bar, the prominent offices he had held, and his 
position as a member of the Pennsylvania Assembly, forbade his being 
treated in the summary fashion of Zenger's earlier counsel, so the repre- 
sentatives of the prosecution could do nothing but submit. They had hopes 
from the jury, and knew that the judges were with them. 

The prosecution claimed that all the jury had to determine was, whether 
the publication which was scheduled as libellous had appeared, and that they 
had nothing to do with the truth or falsity of the libel. Hamilton demurred 
from this, saying he was prepared to admit the publication of the strictures, 
and to prove their truth, leaving the issue to the jury to be whether truth 
was a libel or not. He was overruled by the Court on the inferred ground 
that anything reflecting on the King was a libel. Hamilton then denied 
that the King's representative had the same prerogatives as the sovereign 
himself, and claimed the right of proving the truth of every statement that 
had been made in Zenger's paper. This the Court again overruled, and 
Hamilton then confined his attention to the jury, and made a glowing 
speech on behalf of personal liberty and the right of free criticism, which 
still ranks as one of the masterpieces of American eloquence. " His 
speech," says Dr. Peter Ross, whose account has been chiefly followed, 3 " was 
productive of effect far beyond the limits of the court-room in which it was 
delivered, or the case in which it was used. It started a train of thought 
which fired men's minds, and did more than anything else to give expres- 
sion to the popular desire for freedom." Hamilton admitted again the 

72 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

publication of the words deemed libellous, and urged the jury, even though 
the Court might decide otherwise, to consider the words for themselves, 
and put their own construction upon them. In closing, he said : " You see 
I labor under the weight of many years, and am borne down by many in- 
firmities of body ; yet old and weak as I am, I should think it my duty, if 
required, to go to the uttermost part of the land where my service could 
be of any use in assisting to quench the flame of prosecutions upon informa- 
tions set on foot by the Government to deprive a people of the right of 
remonstrating, and complaining, too, against the arbitrary attempts of 
men in power. Men who oppress and injure the people under their admin- 
istration provoke them to cry out and complain, and then make that very com- 
plaint the foundation for new oppressions and persecutions. . . . The 
question before the Court is not of small or private concern. It is not the 
cause of a poor printer, nor of New York alone, which you are now trying. 
No ! It may in its consequences affect every freeman that lives under the 
British Government upon the main of America. It is the best cause. It is 
the cause of liberty. And I make no doubt but your upright conduct this 
day will not only entitle you to the love and esteem of your fellow-citizens, 
but every man who prefers freedom to a life of slavery will bless and honor 
you, as men who have baffled the attempts of tyranny, and by an impartial 
and incorrupt verdict have made a noble foundation for securing to our- 
selves and our posterity and our neighbors that to which nature and the laws 
of our country have given us a right — the liberty of both exposing and 
opposing arbitrary power, in these parts of the world, at least, by speaking 
and writing truth." 

The prosecution replied, and the Court gave his charge against the 
prisoner ; but Hamilton's eloquence proved irresistible, and the jury, after a 
few minutes' deliberation, brought in a verdict of " Not Guilty." 

How this verdict was received by the citizens of New York who were 
present at Zenger's trial is related by an early historian of that State 4 : 

Shouts shook the hall. The judges threatened the leader of the tumult 
with imprisonment, when a son of Admiral Norris declared himself the 
leader and invited a repetition of the huzzas. The judges had no time for 
a reply, for the shouts were instantly repeated, and Mr. Hamilton was con- 
ducted from the hall by the crowd to a splendid entertainment. The whole 
city renewed the compliment at his departure the next day. He entered 
the barge under a salute of cannon, and the corporation presented him with 
the freedom of the city in a gold box, on which its arms were engraved, en- 
circled with the words, " Demersae Leges, Timefacta Libertas, Hsec 
Tandem Emergunt." 

Dr. John W. Francis states in his description of the city of New York 
(printed in the American edition of Brewster s Encyclopedia, and on page 
400 of Hinton's History of the United States), that Gouverneur Morris told 
him that "the trial of Zenger in 1735 was tne germ of American freedom — 
the morning star of that liberty which subsequently revolutionized America." 

Liberty of Speech and Conscience j$ 

The origin of the so-called Presbyterian, or liberal, party in New York, 
which first committed and then held that colony to the American cause dur- 
ing the Revolution, dates from the time of this trial ; and its importance in 
forming and influencing public sentiment in the middle colonies is well in- 
dicated by the view of the trial generally taken by writers on the opposite 
side since that time. 

In the memoir of Chief Justice James De Lancey, prepared by Edward 
F. De Lancey, and published in the Documentary History of New York, 
vol. iv., pp. 1037-1059, the Zenger case is referred to as follows : 

About two years afterwards came on before the Supreme Court the fa- 
mous trial of John Peter Zenger for a series of libels on the governor and 
chief officers of the colony. He was a printer by trade, in arrears to a small 
amount as collector of taxes in the city, and the Assembly had refused to 
allow him to discharge the small debt by doing public printing enough to 
cover it. 

He subsequently published a small paper entitled the New York Weekly 
Journal, at the instance of the opposition, in which the libels complained of 
were published. His counsel were James Alexander and William Smith, 
the elder, the supposed authors of the libels, two gentlemen of ability and 
intellect, both politically opposed to Chief Justice De Lancey. 

Aware that the law would certainly convict their client, they attempted 
to destroy the court by excepting to the commissions of the judges as in- 
valid and illegal ; though they knew them to be in the usual form, and such 
as their predecessors had always held, and under which they had acted 
for a number of years. Their objections, if valid, would have destroyed 
the court as well as the commissions, for it existed, not by force of any stat- 
ute, as they contended, but by virtue of an ordinance of the governor and 
council, dated May 15, 1699. A formal denial of its existence deliberately 
made was therefore a gross contempt of court, and the Chief Justice from 
the bench warned the counsel of the consequences. But they persisted in 
tendering the exceptions, upon which the court made an order, striking their 
names from its rolls and excluding them from further practice. Zenger, be- 
ing unable to procure other counsel, the court assigned him Mr. Joseph 
Murray, with whom the silenced lawyers associated Mr. Hamilton, of Phila- 
delphia, who made so artful an address to the jury at the trial a few days 
afterwards that, in the words of one of their own [Tory] friends (Smith, 
History of New York, ii., 22), "when he left his client in those hands, such 
was the fraudful dexterity of the orator, and the severity of his invectives 
upon the governor and his adherents, that the jury, missing the true issue 
before them, they, as if triers of their rulers, rather than of Zenger, pro- 
nounced the criminal innocent because they believed them to be guilty." 

Chief Justice De Lancey's course on this occasion has been much misun- 
derstood, owing to the fact that the only report of the trial was that pub- 
lished by Zenger himself, written by the silenced lawyers, and printed, not 
in New York, but in Boston, in 1738, three years after the trial, which of 
course represents him in the worst possible light. Taking the facts of the 
case, however, as given even there, it would be difficult to point out any 
other course which the court could have taken consistently with its own dig- 
nity and self-respect. 

At this period, and from these controversies and others allied to them, 
arose the two great parties which ever afterwards divided the people of the 

74 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

province : the one maintaining principles moderate and conservative ; the 
other, those of a more radical tendency. 

Both professed the strongest attachment and loyalty to the British con- 
stitution, and vied with each other in claiming and upholding all the rights 
of Englishmen. 

In New York, as in some of the other colonies, the religious element en- 
tered largely into politics. In point of wealth and influence the Episco- 
palians were the leading denomination, the Dutch Reformed Church came 
next, and the Presbyterians last ; while in point of numbers their positions 
were exactly reversed, the Presbyterians outnumbering the Dutch, and the 
Dutch the Episcopalians. The last, with most of the Dutch, chiefly be- 
longed to the conservative party ; while the remainder of the Dutch and the 
Presbyterians almost to a man were found in the ranks of the opposition. 

Another and very striking peculiarity in the composition of the colonial 
parties was the remarkable preponderance of the wealth and social position 
of the province on the side of the conservatives [the Loyalist party of 1776]. 
In their ranks were found the Philipses, Van Cortlandts, De Lanceys, 
Bayards, Crugers, Wattses, Waltons, Van Rensselaers, Beekmans, Bleeckers, 
Barclays, Joneses of Long Island, Jays, Verplancks, Harrisons, and other 
substantial families ; while in those of the opposition the Livingstons, 
Morrises, Alexanders, and perhaps the Smiths and one or two more were 
probably all that belonged to the same class. 

Here, then, we find the contest for freedom of public utterance and the 
liberty of the press waged and won in America at least forty years before 
Lexington, and at a time when James Otis and Samuel Adams themselves 
were not long out of their swaddling clothes. Yet, concerning these things, 
the pages of so-called American histories, of the New England school, in 
nine cases out of ten are silent. 

Finally, let us revert to a much earlier period and consider for a moment 
the founding in America of what, with civil liberty, is the twin support of 
the structure of all just and lasting governments, namely, the principle of 
religious freedom. 6 

In Penn's colony liberty of worship was permitted from the beginning of 
his government. In Maryland and in one or two others of the southern col- 
onies, for a short time at the beginning there was the same beneficent pro- 
vision made by their laws or charters, but statutory enactment soon destroyed 
it. Outside of Pennsylvania and Rhode Island, at the beginning of the 
eighteenth century, the English Church had been established by law in most 
of the middle and southern governments, and the Congregational Church in 
those of New England. The Revolution of 1689 had brought to Britain, 
among other blessings, that of the Toleration Act, but its provisions had 
not yet been fully or definitely extended to the American colonies. Rev. 
Francis Makemie, the Scotch-Irish founder of American Presbyterianism, 
had come from County Donegal, Ireland, to the island of Barbadoes about 
1683, and thence proceeded to the eastern shore of Maryland. There and 
along the Elizabeth River in Virginia he began to labor in establishing mis- 
sionary stations among the Scotch and Scotch-Irish families who had settled 

Liberty of Speech and Conscience 75 

in those parts. In the course of twenty years he had helped to build up 
two or three church organizations in that territory, and in 1706 their minis- 
ters united with those of other churches of Maryland, Delaware, and Penn- 
sylvania in forming the Presbytery of Philadelphia. After this organization 
had been made, Makemie undertook a journey to Boston. While on the way 
he stopped and preached in New York, and there the opportunity came to 
him for making that first fight against the encroachments of the English 
Church establishment in America, which resulted in restricting and mini- 
mizing its power forever afterwards. 

After the adjournment of the Presbytery of Philadelphia, October 27, 
1706, Francis Makemie took with him John Hampton and set out on his jour- 
ney, probably to consult with the Boston ministers. They stopped at New 
York on their way. They were invited by the Puritans of the city to preach 
for them. The Consistory of the Dutch Church, in accordance with their 
generous custom, offered their church edifice for the purpose. But their 
kindness was frustrated by the refusal of Governor Cornbury to permit it. 
Makemie, therefore, preached, January 20, 1706-7, in the private house of 
William Jackson, in Pearl Street. 6 The same day, John Hampton preached 
at Newtown, Long Island. On the following Tuesday, Makemie and 
Hampton went to Newtown intending to preach the next day, according to 
appointment ; but they were there arrested on a warrant from Governor 
Cornbury, on the ground that they had preached without his permission. 
They were detained until March 1st, when they were brought before the 
Supreme Court on a writ of habeas corpus. 

The charge against Hampton was not pressed, but Makemie was released 
on bail to appear for trial June 3d. He immediately returned to Philadel- 
phia with Hampton for the meeting of the Presbytery of Philadelphia, March 
22, 1707. From thence he writes to Benjamin Colman, of Boston : 

Since our imprisonment we have commenced a correspondence with our 
rev. breth. of the ministry at Boston, which we hope according to our in- 
tention has been communicated to you all, whose sympathizing concurrence 
I cannot doubt of, in an expensive struggle, for asserting our liberty against 
the powerful invasion of Lord Cornbury, which is not yet over. I need not 
tell you of a picked jury, and the penal laws, are invading our American 
sanctuary without the least regard to the toleration, which should justly 
alarm us all. 

The New England ministers immediately wrote to Sir Henry Ashurst, 
Sir Edmund Harrison, and other London agents, April 1, 1707 : 

Except speedy relief be obtained, the issue will be, not only a vast op- 
pression on a very worthy servant of God, but also a confusion upon the 
whole body of Dissenters in these colonies, where they are languishing under 
my Lord Cornbury's arbitrary and unaccountable government. We do 
therefore earnestly solicit you, that you would humbly petition the Queen's 
Majesty on this occasion, and represent the sufferings of the Dissenters in 
those parts of America which are carried on in so direct violation of her 

j6 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

Majesty's commands, of the laws of the nation, and the common rights of 
Englishmen. (Hutchinson, History of the Province of Massachusetts Bay, 
2d edition, London, 1768, ii., p. 125.) 

Makemie returned to New York and sustained his trial. He was de- 
fended by three of the ablest lawyers in the province — James Reigniere, 
David Jameson, and William Nicholl, made an elaborate and convincing 
argument in defence of his own religious rights, and was acquitted on the 
ground that he had complied with the Toleration Act and had acted 
within his rights as a Presbyterian minister. He produced his license to 
preach under the Toleration Act in Barbadoes, and this was recognized as 
valid throughout the Queen's dominions. The claim of Cornbury, that it 
was necessary that he should have a special license from the governor of 
New York, was simply ridiculous. But, notwithstanding his acquittal, 
Makemie was obliged to pay the costs of the prosecution as well as the 
defence, amounting to the large sum of £83 7s. 6d. " This trial," says 
Professor Briggs, " followed by the bitter pursuit of the acquitted man on 
the part of the wrathful governor, was the culmination of a series of tyran- 
nical acts which aroused the entire Puritan body of the colonies and of 
Great Britain to action. The arbitrary acts of Governor Cornbury were 
indefensible. He had exceeded his prerogative, transgressed the provisions 
of the Toleration Act, and violated the liberties of the Dissenters, and in- 
deed twisted and perverted the royal instructions to himself. He even 
intermeddled with the missionaries of the Society for the Propagation of 
the Gospel in Foreign Parts, and gained the hostility of all the better 
elements in the Church of England." The New York Assembly, in April, 
1707, remonstrated against Cornbury's actions, charged him with bribery, 
with encroachment on the liberties of the people, and finally expressed their 
determination to redress the miseries of their country. He was recalled, 
and in 1709 Lord Lovelace took his place. 7 

An account of Makemie's trial was first printed in 1707, and a second 
publication was made in 1755. The former account was reprinted in 
Force's Tracts in 1846 (vol. iv.), and the latter in Hill's American Presby- 
terianism (1839). For Makemie's argument, see Appendix D. 


1 Of this event, Gouverneur Morris said : " Instead of dating American liberty from the 
Stamp Act, I trace it to the persecution of Peter Zenger, because that event revealed the 
philosophy of freedom both of thought and speech as an inborn human right, so nobly set 
forth in Milton's Treatise on Unlicensed Printing." — Lossing, The Empire State, Hart- 
ford, 1888, p. 147. For Hamilton's argument, see Appendix C. 

2 The account of Zenger's trial was first printed in Boston in 1738, and passed through 
several editions, two of which appeared in London in 1738, and another in Lancaster, Pa., 
in 1756. See Documentary History of New York, vol. iv., p. 104. 

3 The Scot in America, pp. 302-307. 

Liberty of Speech and Conscience yy 

4 William Dunlap, History of New Netherlands, Province of New York, and State of 
New York, vol. i., pp. 298-310. 

5 ' ' Where is the man to be found at this day . . . who will believe that the apprehen- 
sion of Episcopacy contributed fifty years ago, as much as any other cause, to arouse the at- 
tention not only of the inquiring mind, but of the common people, and urge them to close 
thinking on the constitutional authority of Parliament over the colonies ? This, neverthe- 
less, was a fact certain as any in the history of North America. . . 

" The opinion, the principles, the spirit, the temper, the views, designs, intrigues, and ar- 
bitrary exertions of power displayed by the Church of England at that time towards the 
Dissenters, as they were contemptuously called, though in reality the churchmen were the 
real dissenters, ought to be stated at full length. . . . 

" In Virginia, the Church of England was established by law in exclusion and without 
toleration." — John Adams, Works, vol. x., pp. 185, 186. 

At the commencement of the Revolution, public feeling in the eastern colonies was ex- 
cited by the fears of the spiritual jurisdiction of the British ecclesiastics. Elbridge Gerry 
and Samuel Adams, for political effect, led off with predictions as groundless as they were 
vain. Plain facts demonstrated that, notwithstanding these misrepresentations, Episcopa- 
lians were the leading architects of the great work of American Independence. Franklin, 
Laurens, the Pinckneys, Wythe, Marshall, Pendleton, the Randolphs, Hamilton, Washing- 
ton, Jefferson, Patrick Henry, Monroe, Rutledge, the Lees, Jay, Williams, Gen. Wayne, Robt. 
R. Livingston, Gouverneur, Lewis, and Robert Morris, Duer, Duane, Lord Stirling, Wil- 
liam Samuel Johnson, Chase, Madison, and a host of others, distinguished patriots of the 
Revolution, were of the Episcopal Church. — Opdike, History of the Episcopal Church in 
Providence, R, I., pp. 241, 242. 

6 This sermon was printed at Boston in 1707. A reprint of the Boston edition may be 
found in the Collections of the New York Historical Society for the Year 1S70, pp. 409-453. 

1 American Presbyterianism, pp. 152-155. 



THE second reason for the undue prominence of New England in the 
popular conception of American history, to which reference was made 
in the introductory chapter, is found in the absence, for a long time, of any 
systematic or comprehensive treatment by the writers of the middle and 
southern colonies of the history of their own districts. 1 A start was made in 
this direction, it is true, by Dr. David Ramsay in his History of South Carolina 
(1789), followed, with less degrees of excellence, by Hugh Williamson's 
History of North Carolina, Gordon's Histories of Pennsylvania and New Jer- 
sey, and Day's, Howe's, and Barber's Historical Collections of Pennsylvania, 
Virginia, and New Jersey ; but these books were all written at a date when 
there was little material collected or available, and before the inception of 
modern methods of historic inquiry and analysis ; and they are only good 
examples of what can be done by conscientious workmen without 
proper tools, or suitable material at hand on which to work. Bancroft was 
the first American historian to do even partial justice to the subject from a 
national standpoint. Foote's Sketches of Virginia and of North Carolina are 
among the most valuable contributions to the early history of these States 
that we have, but these works were written nearly fifty years ago. Bishop 
Meade's Churches and Families of Virginia also contains a vast amount of 
local and family history in connection with that of the Episcopal churches. 

In New England, from the time of its first settlement, more or less ample 
and detailed records of the political and social history of nearly every 
community, however small, have been preserved in written form, as well as 
much of personal history. The publication of these records, which has 
been carried on for many years by public and private agencies, and their 
use as the bases for many of our popular histories, has served to dissem- 
inate a vastly greater amount of information about the people and events with 
which these records are concerned than those of any other part of America. 

Literary genius, likewise, has aided materially in forming our popular 
ideals of characters and events in connection with certain phases of Ameri- 
can history, particularly with those of New England. Indeed, certain liter- 
ary productions may have been the sole sources of information regarding 
occurrences which are now reputed historic. This has been true in all 
ages. The Arabian Nights, in the incidental evidence which it affords, as 
well as by reason of its own intrinsic merit, must always be our chief 
authority for the high degree of civilization attained by the early Moham- 
medans ; just as the military prowess of ancient Greece has from time 


The American People 79 

immemorial been best appreciated through the glowing imageries of the 
minstrel poet, and the glory of English history been best expressed in the 
imaginary conceptions of an obscure playwright. Shakspeare has given us 
an idea of the character of Richard III. and his predecessors and followers, 
as well as of that of Macbeth, which a more thorough investigation — while 
showing it to be in a large measure false — can never completely correct. 
In like manner, Walter Scott has typified in the personality of the first 
Richard all the romantic tendencies of the age of the Crusaders, with the 
result that his highly idealized portrait will ever be preferred to the less 
flattering though more honest delineation of history. So it is that the best- 
known pictures of early American life and character presented in our roman- 
tic literature, being taken for the most part through New England lenses, 
can be considered, from an historical standpoint, only with due allowance 
for that fact. Hawthorne has immortalized the Puritan, just as Cooper has 
created the American Indian of the popular mind ; yet, however true the 
former's characterization of the early New Englander may be, it has but little 
more value, as a type of the true American eponym, than that of the latter. 

These various aids and influences, either of a literary or historic nature, 
have not until quite recently been available for the study of American his- 
tory in its broader sense ; and we are only just beginning to get the benefit of 
their assistance in the examination of other than the New England portion 
of it. But this examination can never be carried on with entire satisfac- 
tion, until the complete publication of the early records of the general 
government. An attempt was made to this end some fifty or sixty years ago, 
which began quite favorably, and resulted in the publication of Force's 
series of Archives pertaining to affairs at the beginning of the Revolutionary 
struggle, and the projection of other series. But that work was dropped long 
before completion, and beyond nine volumes of Archives of the years 1775 
and 1776, and the several volumes of State Papers of later date, very little 
other data has been printed. There is a vast amount of material relating 
to the colonial period and to the progress of the war and the subsequent 
formation of our system of government which still remains to be published. 

It is, however, to the recent enlightened policy of many of the State gov- 
ernments of the original colonies that we are indebted for the inauguration 
of a movement looking to the conservation of the materials for their early 
history in a form that makes them at once both accessible and capable of 
preservation. This consists in the publication of various volumes of State 
archives, Revolutionary rosters, and documentary and other records, of which 
many series have already been issued by the States of New York, New 
Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina, and others 
are in course of preparation. Of these, by far the most useful and compre- 
hensive in their preparation are the fifty volumes of Archives brought out 
by the State of Pennsylvania under the capable editorship of Dr. William H. 
Egle, for many years the State librarian. 

80 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

In New York, up to 1887, there had been published a Documentary His- 
tory (4 vols., 1850) and seventeen volumes (1856-1887) of documents re- 
lating to the colonial history, including a roster of Revolutionary soldiers. 
New Jersey published twenty volumes of Archives between 1872 and 1893, 
and also a Revolutionary roster. 

Besides these State publications, the various State historical societies of 
the older colonies have also awakened in late years to the fact that, in order 
to justify their right to existence, it will be necessary for them to do some- 
thing of a less trivial nature than merely to publish reports of their business 
meetings and lengthy obituaries of their deceased members. In conse- 
quence we are beginning to benefit by their labors. The New York society 
gives the best promise of future accomplishments, if the industry of its 
members is at all equal to the opportunities afforded in the wealth of 
documentary material now undergoing classification by the State officials. 

The Historical Society of the State of Pennsylvania is unfortunate in being 
located away from the seat of the State government. Its headquarters are 
in Philadelphia, where live most of its members, and consequently its work 
is directed more along the line of local investigation than concerned with 
the history of the State at large. It might more appropriately be called the 
Historical Society of Philadelphia. In that field its labors are invaluable. 
Its chief publication is the Pennsylvania Magazine, a large quarterly, estab- 
lished in 1877, and a model periodical of the class. In the Society's early 
days a number of volumes relating to the history of the State were also issued, 
but few in recent years. The inattention on the part of this Society to that 
portion of the State outside of Philadelphia, however, is more than made up 
by the private enterprise of Dr. Egle, already mentioned in connection with 
the publication of the State Archives. During the past twenty years this gen- 
tleman, in addition to his work on the State Archives, published on his own 
behalf more than a dozen volumes of historical collections relating to inte- 
rior Pennsylvania. The debt owed to him by all students of that part of 
early American history is one that will steadily increase with the passing 
years. The chief work of the Maryland society up to this date has been 
the preparation of sixteen volumes of Maryland Archives (1883-1897), which 
were printed by the State, and nine or ten volumes of Collections. The 
Historical Society of Richmond has also contributed nearly a dozen volumes 
(1882-1891) of Collections relating to Virginia. There is a rich field in that 
State for the future historian of America, but up to the present time a 
comparative dearth of published material. Some early history of North 
Carolina, including a roster of Revolutionary soldiers, has been given in the 
Colonial Records of that State (18 vols., 1886-1900) ; but South Carolina 
has produced only a few small volumes of Collections, issued by its Histori- 
cal Society some forty years ago (1857-59) ; and Georgia still less. 

In addition to the various general historical societies in these States, there 
are also many other organizations devoted to the collection of historical 

The American People 81 

matter relating to special classes of the population. Of these may be men- 
tioned the Holland Society of New York, the Huguenot Society, and the 
Scotch-Irish Society of America. The one last named held an annual con- 
gress each year from 1889 to 1897, and published nine volumes of its Collec- 
tions. Their contents are chiefly made up from the addresses delivered at 
the annual meetings; hence there is considerable difference in their degrees 
of merit. 

None of these works compare in thoroughness or scope with the 
publications of the New England State governments and of their various 
historical and antiquarian societies. There is nothing in the Middle States 
equal to the Plymouth or Suffolk Records of Massachusetts, for instance ; 
or the Provincial, State, or Town Papers of New Hampshire ; or the New 
England Historical and Genealogical Register. 

As another result of the fecundity and one-sidedness of the New England \/ 
writers before 1870, it has been long customary to ascribe to the English 
element in the American population the credit not only for all the early 
achievements of the nation in war and peace, 3 but also for having furnished 
practically all the colonists who settled in the country before the Revolu- 
tion. 3 As a matter of fact, nothing could be more erroneous. The population 
of the New England States at the date of the first general census (1790) was 
1,009,408, and the total white population of the country, 3,172,006. Bancroft 
estimated the white population of the colonies in 1775 to have been about 
2,100,000; and as it is probable that the New England population did not 
increase so rapidly between 1775 and 1790 as that of the other States, we 
may safely estimate it at one-third of the total population in 1775. 

Of the total white population at the outbreak of the Revolution there is 
abundant evidence to show that at least one-third was not of English descent 
or sympathies at all, but consisted of a variety of nationalities, including the 
Germans, French, Hollanders, Swedes, and others. The Germans and Swiss 
comprised nearly a third of the population of Pennsylvania in 1776, 4 and they 
likewise had formed many communities in western Maryland and northern 
Virginia, as well as in the lower country of South Carolina. The Swedes 
made the first settlements in Pennsylvania and Delaware; but these were 
afterwards overrun by the Dutch, who acquired most of the territory along 
the Delaware River, as well as that of the Hudson and Mohawk valleys in 
New York, and a considerable portion of New Jersey. The Welsh had large 
grants of land and numerous settlements in Delaware and southeastern 
Pennsylvania. The French, usually Huguenot refugees from the German 
Palatine, or from Holland or Ireland, were likewise among the early colo- 
nizers of Pennsylvania, and the same people formed a large part of the first 
European population of the Carolinas. But the settlements of all these dif- 
ferent nationalities taken together did not begin to equal in number or 
importance those of another class of people with which we now have to deal 
— a class that was as distinctly non-English as many of those just named ; 


2>2 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

and one that had infinitely greater reason than any of the others for resenting 
the course of injustice and oppression so long pursued in the administration 
of the British Government. 5 

These were the Scots of North Britain and North Ireland, a composite 
race, even at that time having in the organic make-up of each individual a 
combination of the several racial elements which were almost, identical with 
those now forming the present collective population of America, and from 
which the American of the future is gradually being evolved. Theirs was the 
one representative and typical race in America with which all others are com- 
ing more and more to conform. That is to say, these Attacot-Goidelic-Cymro- 
Anglo-Norse-Danish Scots of colonial times, these Celto-Teutonic emigrants 
to America of the eighteenth century, combined in their individual bodies 
the physical attributes of the Angle, the Gael, the Norse, and the Brython. 
In their veins was already blended the blood of the various peoples which in 
the past hundred years have been pouring millions of individuals into the 
race alembic called America ; and to a far greater extent than any of their 
neighbors were these Scottish emigrants of the eighteenth century the true 
prototypes of the typical American of the twentieth. 8 

Their settlements in America began in the seventeenth century but were 
made chiefly in the eighteenth. At the time of the Revolution these 
people comprised fully forty per cent, of the patriotic population of the 
country south of New England. 

The Continental Congress of 1776 made an estimate of the population of 
the thirteen original colonies as a basis from which to apportion the expense 
of the war. 7 The figures of this conjectural census of Congress are as 
follows : 

New Hampshire 102,000 

Massachusetts (including Maine) 352,000 

Rhode Island 58,000 

Connecticut 202,000 

New York (including Vermont) 238,000 

New Jersey 138,000 

Pennsylvania 341,000 

Delaware 37,000 

Maryland 174,000 

Virginia (including Kentucky) 300,000 

North Carolina (including Tennessee) 181,000 

South Carolina 93,000 

Georgia 27,000 

Total white population 2,243,000 

Slave population 500,000 

2,743,000 s 

This estimate is now generally conceded to have been too large, since the 

census of 1790 showed a total white population of only 3,172,006 ; and as 

the average normal rate of increase of population in America ever since we 

have had any data to enable us to strike an average has been about three 

The American People 83 

per cent, a year, the population doubling about every twenty-three years, it 
would appear that the actual population of the colonies in 1776 was about 
ten per cent, less than the congressional estimate. For the purpose of 
lessening its proportion of the general tax, New Hampshire caused a State 
census to be taken in 1782, and as a result of that census reported its popu- 
lation at 82,000, but this figure was in all probability as far below the true 
number as that of the congressional estimate was above it. Pennsylvania 
had not quite 40,000 taxables in 1770. Counting six persons to one taxpayer, 
the population then would have been about 240,000, and, with an annual 
increase of three per cent., about 280,000 in 1776. There was, however, a 
very large immigration of Ulster Scots into this province in 1773 and it is 
probable the report made by Governor Penn to Lord Dartmouth, January 
30, 1 775," fixing the white population at 300,000, was not far from the truth. 
Bancroft, as stated before, estimated the total white population of the colonies 
in 1775 to have been 2, 100,000. 10 It would seem that we can safely follow 
this estimate, and assign 700,000, or one-third, to the territory east of the 
Hudson. 11 Of the 1,400,000 west of the Hudson and south of the St. Law- 
rence, the following is probably as close and accurate an estimate as can be 
made from the data now available, the estimated 1,400,000 of inhabitants 
being apportioned among the nine States in accordance with their relative 
populations in 1790 : 

New York (excluding Vermont) 202,000 

New Jersey 109,000 

Pennsylvania 273,000 

Delaware 30,000 

Maryland 134,000 

Virginia (including Kentucky) 325,000 

North Carolina (including Tennessee) 206,000 

South Carolina 90,000 

Georgia 34,ooo 

Total 1,403,000 

Now, we may safely estimate the proportion of inhabitants of Scottish 
blood or descent to have been one-eighth of the whole white population in 
New York ; one-fifth to one-fourth in the States of New Jersey, Maryland, 
and Virginia ; more than one-third in Pennsylvania, Delaware, North Caro- 
lina, and Georgia ; and one-half in South Carolina. 19 

Using the census of 1790 as a basis on which to apportion the population 
in 1775, we find from the foregoing estimates that the number of inhabitants 
of Scottish ancestry at that time in the nine colonies south of New England 
(there were probably 25,000 in New England) was close to 385,000, as 
follows : 

New York 25,000 

New Jersey 25,000 

Pennsylvania ico,ooo 

84 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

Delaware 10,000 

Maryland 30,000 

Virginia 75,ooo 

North Carolina 65,000 

South Carolina 45,°oo 

Georgia 10,000 

Total 385,000 

Of the 1,400,000 total white population of these States it is probable that 
nearly one-third were in open or secret sympathy with the Crown during the 
Revolution, and did not voluntarily contribute either men or means to the 
American cause. Many of these were engaged in active hostilities against 
the patriotic party, particularly in New York and North and South Carolina, 
in the latter of which States at times more than half the population is said to 
have been on the English side. John Adams estimated that about one-third 
of the Americans were Loyalists in the first years of the struggle, though he 
sometimes reduced this figure considerably. 13 It would perhaps be not an 
exaggeration to say that in Maryland and Virginia in 1776 one-sixth of the 
white population was opposed to the war and to independence, and was to a 
greater or less extent Loyalist ; in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware, 
one-third ; and in New York, Georgia, and the Carolinas, two-fifths. 14 If 
these figures may be taken as fairly accurate in the aggregate, they would 
reduce the patriotic population to somewhat below a million, outside of New 
England; and of that number it is altogether likely that less than half were 
of English extraction. 

Concerning the patriotism of the Scotch-Irish, the general testimony of 
contemporary and later writers is to the effect that there were no Tories 
among them, and that they were found uniformly arrayed against the British ; 
but it is probable this statement can be taken as applicable only in a general 
way and one to which many individual exceptions may be noted. One of 
these exceptions was that of the notorious renegade, Simon Girty 
and his brothers, who were probably Scotch-Irish on their mother's side. 
The Scotch (Jacobite) Highlanders of North Carolina principally settled 
along the Cape Fear River, were nearly all active Tory partisans, 16 as were 
also the Scotch Catholics of New York. Many Scottish names appear in 
Sabine's list of Loyalists, principally from these two States ; and some also 
from Pennsylvania, among which may be mentioned that of Galloway. 18 

Among the British and Tory leaders in the South during the Revolu- 
tionary War may be mentioned Colonel Patrick Ferguson, Major James 
Dunlap, Captains Patrick and John Moore, Captain Peter Campbell, Captain 
Cunningham, Major Fraser, Lieutenant John McGinnis, Captain Walter Gil- 
key, Captain Grimes, Captain Wilson, Lieutenant Lafferty, Captain Alexan- 
der Cameron, Captain James Kerr, Lieutenant-Colonel Alexander Innes, all 
apparently of Scotch or Scotch-Irish origin, and many of them born in 
America. In the West were Governor Hamilton, Dr. John Connolly, the 

The American People 85 

Girty brothers, McKee, Elliott, and others ; while with Howe's northern 
army undoubtedly the greatest soldier was General James Grant. 


1 " A good deal of surprise was expressed at the Congress [of the Scotch-Irish Society of 
America, held in 1889] that a history of the Scotch-Irish had never been attempted ; but we 
do not have to seek far for the reason. There is ample material from which to speak in a 
general way of their origin and of their existence in Ireland, but when we come to their 
emigration to America, excepting the causes which led to it, it is meagre in the extreme. 
Coming from one part of Great Britain to another, no record has been preserved of their 
arrivals as would have been the case had they been of alien origin ; and all we know is that 
while a large majority came to Pennsylvania, others settled in Virginia and the Carolinas. 
The country along the Atlantic coast was then comparatively thickly settled, and the Scotch- 
Irish took up their abodes on the outskirts of civilization. This was not because the 
Quakers sent them there, as has been asserted, to protect their own settlements from the 
Indians, or because the Scotch-Irish did not wish to live near the Quakers, who were con- 
tinually finding fault with them, but for the same reason that now takes the emigrants to the 
West, — i. e., because there good land is cheap, and large families can be supported at a small 
expense. They took with them their religion and their schools, and those in Pennsylvania 
extended their settlements across the mountains and down the valley into Maryland and 
Virginia. There they met with their brethren from Virginia and Carolina, and penetrated 
into the country now included in the States of Kentucky and Tennessee. Excepting in a 
general way the records of this emigration are difficult to trace, and are only found by 
examining old deeds, wills, and in family tradition. 

" It must also be remembered that in no way, in the same sense of the word, did the 
Scotch-Irish Presbyterians settle a colony as the Puritans settled Massachusetts, the Quakers 
Pennsylvania, the Catholics Maryland, or the Episcopalians Virginia. They belonged to 
a later wave of emigration than any of the above, and when they arrived on this side of the 
Atlantic, governments were firmly established. The consequence is that there are no early 
governmental records that can be quoted as giving expression to their views. Besides this, 
the worldly condition of many of the emigrants was not such as would permit them to take 
an active part in political affairs, as the elective franchise was then limited by a property 
qualification, and some of those who might have claimed the right to vote were too deeply 
engaged in providing for their families to take an active part in politics. It was not, there- 
fore, until they gained a foothold, and by their thrift, energy, and enterprise made their 
settlements important, that they exercised any influence in colonial affairs. When this 
point was gained they brought into public life an element directly antagonistic to the estab- 
lished order of things, and no one can deny that they were instrumental in bringing about 
the War for Independence, which they loyally supported. What the result of their influence 
would have been in Kentucky and Tennessee, where they were pioneer settlers, had it not 
been for the Revolution, we can only surmise. After that, civil and religious liberty were 
such cardinal principles of government, that it is not safe to attribute them to any one class. 
The material for the history of the Scotch-Irish in this country we fear has been largely 
destroyed. Some portion of it may yet exist in private letters, in church records, and in 
the diaries that some of their ministers wrote while travelling from one settlement to an- 
other. Much can also be accomplished by preparing memoirs, as full of original material 
as possible, of early settlers in various parts of the country." — Frederick D. Stone, in The 
Pennsylvania Magazine, January, 1890. 

5 The trouble with the historical writers who have taken upon themselves the defence of 
the founders of Massachusetts is that they have tried to sophisticate away the facts. In so 

86 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

doing they have of necessity had recourse to lines of argument which they would not for an 
instant accept in defence or extenuation of those who in the Old World pursued the policy 
with which they find themselves confronted in the early record of the New. But there that 
record is : and it will not out. Roger Williams, John Wheelwright, and Anne Hutchinson 
come back from their banishment, and stand there as witnesses ; the Quakers and Baptists, 
with eyes that forever glare, swing from the gallows or turn about at the cart's tail. In 
Spain it was the dungeon, the rack, and the fagot ; in Massachusetts it was banishment, the 
whip, and the gibbet. In neither case can the records be obliterated. Between them it is 
only a question of degree, — one may in color be a dark drab, while the other is unmistakably 
a jetty black. The difficulty is with those who, while expatiating with great force of lan- 
guage on the sooty aspect of the one, turn and twist the other in the light, and then solemnly 
asseverate its resemblance to driven snow. Unfortunately for those who advocate this view 
of the respective Old and New World records, the facts do not justify it. On the contrary, 
while the course in the matter of persecution pursued by those in authority in the Old World 
was logical and does admit of defence, the course pursued by the founders of Massachusetts 
was illogical, and does not admit of more than partial extenuation. — Charles Francis 
Adams, Massachusetts : Its Historians and Its History \ p. 34. 

3 See New Englander Magazine, vol. x., pp. 393-414, for an elaborate example of this 
false enumeration. 

4 Proud, History of Pennsylvania, vol. ii., p. 273. 

5 Driven from their adopted home in the north of Ireland by English persecution, there 
was burned into their very souls the bitter recollection of English ingratitude and English 
broken faith. They were un-English in their origin, and they came to America — which 
they have always looked upon as their only country — hating England, her Church, and her 
form of government with the intensest hatred. They contributed as little which was original 
to American institutions as did the Puritans of New England ; but they were also as willing 
to accept new ideas from other quarters, and they contributed elements to American thought 
and life without which the United States of to-day would be impossible. By them American 
independence was first openly advocated, and but for their efforts, seconding those of the 
New England Puritans, that independence would not have been secured. — Campbell, The 
Puritan in Holland, England, and America, vol. ii., p. 471. 

6 " The backwoods mountaineers . . . were all cast in the same mould, and resembled 
each other much more than any of them did their immediate neighbors of the plains. The 
backwoodsmen of Pennsylvania had little in common with the peaceful population of Quakers 
and Germans who lived between the Delaware and the Susquehanna ; and their near kinsmen 
of the Blue Ridge and the Great Smoky Mountains were separated by an equally wide gulf 
from the aristocratic planter communities that flourished in the tide- water regions of Virginia 
and the Carolinas. . . . 

" The backwoodsmen were Americans by birth and parentage, and of mixed race ; but 
the dominant strain in their blood was that of the Presbyterian Irish — the Scotch-Irish as 
they were often called. . . . Mingled with the descendants of many other races, they nev- 
ertheless formed the kernel of the distinctively and intensely American stock who were the 
pioneers of our people in their march westward, the vanguard of the army of fighting settlers, 
who with axe and rifle won their way from the Alleghanies to the Rio Grande and the Pacific. 
. . . The Presbyterian Irish stock furnished Andrew Jackson, Samuel Houston, David 
Crockett, James Robertson, Lewis, the leader of the backwoods hosts in their first great 
victory over the northwestern Indians, and Campbell, their commander in their first great 
victory over the British. . . . 

44 That these Irish Presbyterians were a bold and hardy race is proved by their at once 
pushing past the settled regions, and plunging into the wilderness as the leaders of the white 
advance. They were the first and last set of immigrants to do this ; all others have merely 
followed in the wake of their predecessors. But indeed, they were fitted to be Americans 

The American People 87 

from the very start ; they were kinsfolk of the Covenanters ; they deemed it a religious duty 
to interpret their own Bible, and held for a divine right the election of their own clergy. 
For generations their whole ecclesiastic and scholastic systems had been fundamentally 
democratic. . . ." — Roosevelt, Winning of the West, vol. i., pp. 102-106. 
'Pitkin's Statistics, p. 583 ; Harper's Magazine, vol. li., p. 399. 

8 John Adams gives the following estimate as one made by Congress in 1774: " In 
the year 1774 there was much private conversation among the members of Congress con- 
cerning the number of souls in each colony. The delegates of each were consulted, and the 
estimates made by them were taken down as follows : New Hampshire, 150,000 ; Massa- 
chusetts, 400,000 ; Rhode Island, 59,678 ; Connecticut, 192,000 ; New York, 250,000 ; 
New Jersey, 130,000 ; Pennsylvania and Delaware, 350,000 ; Maryland, 320,000 ; Vir- 
ginia, 640,000 ; North Carolina, 300,000 ; South Carolina, 225,000 ; total, 3,016,678." — 
Works, vol. vii., p. 302. " Governor Pownall thinks that 2,142,037 would come nearest to 
the real amount [of whites] in 1774." — Ibid., vol. vii., p. 304. See, also, Holmes's Annals, 
vol. ii., p. 533, etc. "An estimate of the white population of the States made in 1783 for 
purposes of assessment gives the number as 2,389,300 {American Remembrancer, 1783, part 
ii., p. 64)." — McMaster, History of the United States, vol. i., p. 9. 

9 Pennsylvania Archives, First Series, vol. iv., p. 597. 

10 History of the United States (1888), vol. iv., p. 62. 

11 The population of the New England States in 1790 was 1,009,408, or a little less than 
one-third of the total white population of 3,172,006. It is reasonable to assume that the 
population of the newer middle colonies increased more by immigration between 1776 and 
1790 than that of New England, and we know that many New England people moved into 
the western colonies, particularly to New York and Ohio. It is therefore probable that 
an estimate of New England's population in 1776 fixing it at one-third of the whole cannot 
be far out of the way. 

12 The following estimate of the white population in 1775, which does not vary much from 
that given in the table quoted, is found in Seaman's Essays on the Progress of Nations, New 
York, 1852, pp. 579-583 : " Maine, 45,000 ; New Hampshire, 90,000 ; Vermont, 40,000 ; Mas- 
sachusetts, 280,000 ; Rhode Island, 50,000 ; Connecticut, 195,000 [total for New England, 
700,000] ; New York, 175,000 ; New Jersey, 120,000 ; Pennsylvania, 275,000 ; Delaware, 
35,000 ; Maryland, 160,000 ; Virginia, 360,000 ; North Carolina, 200,000 ; South Carolina, 
90,000 J.Georgia, 25,000 [total, outside of New England, 1,440,000] ; total for the thirteen 
colonies, 2,140,000." Mr. Seaman's estimate of the population of Maryland is perhaps based 
on a census taken in 1755, giving it 107,208 white inhabitants ; but as there were but 208,649 
whites in 1790, the population could not have increased as rapidly during the interim as in 
the other States, where it usually doubled in from twenty to twenty-five years. Hence, it is 
probable that 160,000 is too large an estimate for the population of Maryland in 1775, and, on 
the other hand, 134,000 (about 64 per cent, of the population in 1790) may be somewhat 
below the true figures. In New Jersey in 1830, out of a total white population of 299,667, 
there were about 44,000 communicants in the various churches, representing with their 
families perhaps 200,000 persons. Of these, 13,517 were Presbyterians; 15,567, Metho- 
dists; 6,000, Quakers; 4,173, Dutch Reformed; 3,981, Baptists; and 900, Episcopalians. 
It is safe to say the Presbyterians were chiefly Scottish ; and likewise a considerable pro- 
portion of the Methodists and Baptists, because in the South, for instance, there are more 
persons of that blood in those two churches than in the whole membership of the Presby- 
terian Church. Smith, in his History of the Province of New Jersey, published in 1765, 
gives information respecting the number of the various congregations in the province, from 
which the following table is compiled : Episcopalians, 21 ; Presbyterians, 65 ; Quakers, 39 ; 
Baptists, 20 ; Seventh-Day Baptists, 2 ; Low Dutch Calvinists, or Reformed, 21 ; Dutch 
Lutherans, 4 ; Swedish Lutherans, 4 ; Moravians, 1 ; German Lutherans, 2 ; Separatists, 1 ; 
Rogerians, 1 ; Lutherans, I ; total, 179, In Pennsylvania in 1760 there were 31,667 taxables 

88 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

(Colonial Records, vol. xiv., p. 336). At that time a large part of the frontier inhabitants 
were not entered on the tax-lists (see Proud's History of Pennsylvania, vol. ii., p. 275, 
note). Delaware formed part of Pennsylvania prior to 1776, and was largely overrun by 
the Scotch-Irish before they reached the Susquehanna valley. A considerable part of western 
Maryland was settled by Scottish emigrants, as well as Cecil and Somerset counties on 
the Eastern Shore, and many districts around Baltimore. Jefferson states in his Auto- 
biography (p. 31), that in 1776 a majority of the inhabitants of Virginia were Dissenters 
(at that time chiefly Presbyterians and Baptists), and as one-fourth of the total white popu- 
lation was in the upper country and west of the mountains (see Virginia Militia returns in 
1782, annexed to chapter ix., Jefferson's Notes on Virginia), and that fourth almost to a 
man of Scottish ancestry, we may safely conclude that of the whole white population those 
people comprised nearly one-fourth. Williamson (History of North Carolina, vol. ii. , p. 68) 
says that the Scottish race was the most numerous in the northwestern part of Carolina; and 
we know that they comprised nearly the whole of the population of Tennessee (then part of 
North Carolina). Ramsay says they were more numerous than any other race in South Caro- 
lina (History of South Carolina, vol. i., p. 20); and they likewise formed, if not a majority, at 
least a controlling element in the population of Georgia. To-day their descendants in the 
Carolinas, Georgia, Tennessee, Kentucky, and West Virginia form the most influential and 
presumably the most numerous element in the white population of those States; and in all pro- 
bability the same thing is true of the native-born population of Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois. 

" When the first Continental Congress began its sittings, the only frontiersmen west of the 
mountains, and beyond the limits of continuous settlement within the old thirteen colonies, 
were the two or three hundred citizens of the little Watauga commonwealth. This quali- 
fication is put in because there were already a few families on the Monongahela [this is in- 
correct, because there were 7500 to 10,000 settlers in Westmoreland County, Pa., before 1776], 
the head of the Kanawha, and the Upper Holston ; but they were in close touch with the 
people behind them. When peace was declared with Great Britain, the backwoodsmen had 
spread westward in groups, almost to the Mississippi, and they had increased in number to 
some twenty-five thousand souls, of whom a few hundred dwelt in the bend of the Cumber- 
land, while the rest were about equally divided between Kentucky and Holston. These 
figures are simply estimates ; but they are based on careful study and comparison, and, though 
they must be some hundreds, and maybe some thousands, out of the way, are quite near 
enough for practical purposes." — Roosevelt, Winning of the West, vol. ii., p. 370. 

13 " New York and Pennsylvania were so nearly divided — if their propensity was not 
against us — that if New England on one side and Virginia on the other had not kept them 
in awe, they would have joined the British." — Works of John Adams, vol. x., p. 63. This 
opinion of John Adams, which he affirmed more than once in the latter part of his life, was 
on one occasion mentioned by him in a letter to his old compatriot, Thomas McKean, Chief 
Justice of Pennsylvania, a signer of the Declaration of Independence, and a member of 
every American Congress from that of 1765 to the close of the Revolution. "You say," 
wrote McKean in reply, "that . . . about a third of the people of the colonies were 
against the Revolution. It required much reflection before I could fix my opinion on this 
subject ; but on mature deliberation I conclude you are right, and that more than a third of 
influential characters were against it " (Adams's Works, vol. x., pp. 63, no). — Sparks, Wash- 
ington, vol. ii., p. 496. 

John Adams was of the opinion that only about a third of the people were averse to the 
Revolution, but in 1780 in his letters to Calkoen, written to secure Dutch sympathy, he flatly 
affirms that the Tories constituted not a twentieth of the population, which may mean that 
he thought the French alliance and the progress of the war had diminished at that time 
the body of its opponents. — Winsor, Narrative and Critical History of America, vol. vii., 
p. 187. 

It is probably below the truth to say that a full half of the more honorable and respected 

The American People 89 

Americans was either openly or secretly hostile to the Revolution. — Lecky, England in the 
Eighteenth Century, vol. iv., p. 153. 

14 " Of the New England colonies Connecticut had the greatest number of Tories, and 
next in proportion to population was the district which was afterwards known as the 
State of Vermont. 

" . . . In Virginia, especially after hostilities began, the Tories were decidedly less in 
number than the Whigs. In North Carolina, the two parties were about evenly divided. 
In South Carolina, the Tories were the numerous party ; while in Georgia their majority 
was so great that, in 1781, they were preparing to detach that colony from the general 
movement of the rebellion, and probably would have done so, had it not been for the 
embarrassing accident which happened to Cornwallis at Yorktown in the latter part of that 
year." — Moses Coit Tyler, in American Historical Review, vol. i., p. 28 (October, 1895). 

Considerable information in regard to the Loyalists may be found in Winsor's Narrative 
and Critical History of America, vol. vii., pp. 185-214, and in Sabine's Loyalists of the 

15 A strong contrast to the political apathy of these worthy men [the Germans of South 
Carolina] was to be found in the rugged population of the upland counties. Here, the small 
farmers of Scotch-Irish descent were, every man of them, Whigs, burning with a patriotic 
ardor that partook of the nature of religious fanaticism ; while on the other hand the [High- 
land] Scotsmen who had come over since Culloden were mostly Tories, and had by no 
means as yet cast off that half-savage type of Highland character which we find so vividly 
portrayed in the Waverley novels. — Fiske, American Revolution, vol. ii., p. 165. 

The single exception was that of some of the Highlanders in North Carolina at the 
beginning of the Revolution. Banished from Scotland for taking up arms for the Pretender, 
their pardon was conditioned on a solemn oath of allegiance to their sovereign. Such obli- 
gations they regarded with peculiar sacredness, and they had required the king to swear to 
the Solemn League and Covenant. Not feeling to any great degree the evils complained of 
by the other colonists, they were slow to engage in the contest. Some of them at first 
sympathized with and aided the royalists ; but when the monarchical government came to an 
end, they became the fast friends and supporters of republican institutions. We may respect 
their moral principles, while we deplore their error of judgment, that led them at first to 
battle with freemen who were only demanding their rights. — Craighead, Scotch and Irish 
Seeds in American Soil, p. 315. See also Colonial Records of North Carolina, vol. v., pp. 

16 See Appendix E (Parliamentary Examination of Joseph Galloway, March, 1779). 



IT is difficult to understand the grounds for claiming that the credit for the 
conception or development of the principle of man's equality belongs to 
the English. So far as history and the observation of life reveal, that prin- 
ciple is not established in England to-day, nor even recognized by any 
more than a small part of its population. Still less was it the case more 
than a hundred years ago, either in England or in English colonies. The 
distinctions of caste remained longer as bitter realities in Massachusetts than 
they did in Virginia ; and so far from either of those States being the first to 
introduce the principles of democracy, it does not seem to be overstating it 
to say that Quaker Pennsylvania, with two-thirds of its population non-Eng- 
glish, had more real freedom and political equality twenty years before 1787, 
than Massachusetts or Virginia had twenty years after that date. Neither 
can it be considered an exaggeration to say that those embryonic principles 
of civil liberty which first were brought to New England by the Pilgrims 
from Holland, then for one hundred and thirty years buried and forgotten 
in the sterile soil of later New England Puritanism, and which finally seemed 
to germinate spontaneously and produce such abundant fruit during the 
Revolutionary period, did not come chiefly from England, but came rather 
from the influence of the French writers, and from Switzerland and the 
Dutch Republic. 

Prior to 1850 Massachusetts remained essentially English, and would be 
so to-day were it not for the large influx of foreign population during the 
past fifty years. If there is any one characteristic that distinguishes 
the Englishman more than another, it is his persistent assertion — and, 
where he is able, the maintenance — of his own rights. This is doubtless a 
consequence of his Teutonic nature. It comes from the realization of his 
own intrinsic excellence, and from that spirit which prompts him to go out 
and subdue the earth. Unless constantly held in check, however, it is very 
easy for him to overstep the line between his own rights and the rights of 
others ; and so far as he is free to act upon his own racial instincts, he does 
overstep this line. This is strictly in accordance with the theory of evolu- 
tion. If the Englishman did not do so unto others it might be so done unto 
him. We see manifestations of this encroaching spirit, in all aspects of 
English life or history, from the time of Hengist and Horsa down to the 
time of Jameson's Raid, and from the days of John Smith and John Win- 
throp down to the days of the year 1901. It is this aggressive spirit which 
proudly points the way to the universal dominion of the so-called Anglo- 
Saxon race ; and it is the one attribute without which the Anglo-Saxon's 


American Ideals 


further racial progress, according to his own view, would be impossible. 
Hence, to repeat, the Englishman has a greater regard for his own rights than 
for those of others. So truly is this the case, that the rights of his weaker 
neighbor are invariably sacrificed, whenever the two clash together. As a 
result, there can be no real equality among the English. There is not such 
a thing in England to-day, nor indeed any pretence of it. Socially, the dis- 
tinctions of caste and rank are perhaps not so strongly marked there between 
the various classes as were those between master and slave in early America, 
but the distance between the high and the low is almost as great, — and the 
abject wretchedness of the poorest class in England is far more noticeable. 
The opportunities of the individual are likewise restricted wholly to those of 
his particular class, and it is only by a miracle that he can ever hope to break 
through into a higher and better association. 

Down to a few years before the Revolutionary War, the Englishman of 
New England did not differ greatly from his kinsmen at home. He had the 
same aggressive and independent nature, the same reverence for ecclesiastical 
and political power, the same suspicion, jealousy, and hatred of things not 
English, and the same bitter intolerance and persecuting spirit for all opinions 
not identical with his own. The Puritans who came to Massachusetts before 
1640 soon forgot the lessons of forbearance and justice they had learned at 
home when persecuted for conscience* sake. They and their children re- 
tained the pride of caste, the arrogance, the narrow-mindedness, and the 
bigotry of the ruling class at home. They made laws prohibiting people of 
the poorer classes from wearing as good clothing as their superiors in wealth 
and position. They established a State church, and enforced conformity to 
its worship and universal contributions to its support, by means of the 
whipping-post, the jails, and the gibbet. 1 They limited suffrage to the mem- 
bers of the Established Church ; and during most of the time they required 
qualifications for church-membership which were wholly secular and which 
had no connection whatever with religion. 9 

In all respects, their government prior to 1760 partook only of the nature 
of an ecclesiastical and aristocratic oligarchy, and it was more than sixty 
years after that time before the principle of equal rights became fully estab- 
lished in Massachusetts.* 

In America, as in every other country, the first to appreciate the necessity 
for man's equality before the law were those who had suffered most from 
the perversions of justice. These were the early Pilgrims, the Quakers, the 
Catholics, the Baptists, and the Scotch-Irish Presbyterians. As a rule, the 
oppressed can better be relied upon to distinguish between right and wrong 
than the oppressors. They have a keener moral sense, and their more active 
exercise of nature's first instinct teaches them the necessity of giving due 
deference to the rights of their fellow men. 

As we know, laws are but limitations upon arbitrary power ; and the 
battle for man's industrial, political, and religious freedom has ever been a 

92 The Scotch- Irish Families of America 

contest between vested interests and highly privileged power on the one side, 
and unaided, suffering, and burden-bearing humanity on the other. Injus- 
tice must be long endured and its oppressions made intolerable before the 
weaker masses who suffer from its burdens can acquire enough intelligent 
strength to resist, and to bring about reforms. Reforms rarely originate 
with the power-holding classes ; but are granted by them as concessions — 
indeed, usually wrung from them by repeated and urgent protests, prayers, 
and, at certain long intervals, by the sword of the revolutionist. 

The oppressed and persecuted, therefore, are those to whom mankind 
owes its greatest social blessings. They ever stand as living witnesses against 
injustice and tyranny. They are the first to demand reforms. In the days 
of Rome, they raised the standard of the Cross, around which in due time 
the men of all nations gathered. Under this standard was erected later the 
most effective system ever devised by the genius of man for curbing the 
despots of paganism — a system so well organized, indeed, that when the evils 
which it was created to destroy had been wellnigh stamped out it gave those 
evils a new lease on life by introducing their spirit into its own religious pol- 
ity, resulting in the massacres of the Reformation period. 

So, in the days of John Knox, the blood of the early Scottish martyrs 
was the seed not only of the British Protestant Church, but of the greater 
tree of human liberty, which grew up and flourished under his fostering care; 
yielding its fruits in abundant measure when the time came for Scotland 
to take the lead against tyranny and to preserve for herself, for England, and 
for all mankind the threatened heritage of granted liberties. 4 

To a vastly greater extent does America owe her love of liberty to 
those who had suffered from persecution. At an early day becoming the 
harbor and home of the oppressed of all nations, its shores ever received the 
exiles, the refugees, and the proscribed of the monarchies of Europe. Here 
came the Pilgrim, the Puritan, the Baptist, the Quaker, the Mennonite, the 
Moravian, the Catholic, the Huguenot, and the Presbyterian. Here these 
people felled the forests, subdued the wilderness, planted the soil, established 
towns, raised schoolhouses, built churches, and in every way prepared them- 
selves to guard the precious treasure of civil and religious liberty which they 
had crossed unknown seas to obtain. However, with the lapse of years and 
the coming of children and grandchildren, some of them grew to forget the 
lessons of liberty which they had learned in the old world, and remembered 
only the deeper-grounded hereditary admonitions of their earlier persecut- 
ing forefathers. These colonists reverted to the same life of injustice and 
oppression which their cousins still lived at home. 

This, as has been already intimated, and as we shall more fully perceive 
in the pages following, was particularly the case in New England and Virginia. 
In the former colony, the retrogression was rapid and marked. To use the 
expression of its most candid native expositor, the period between 1637 and 
1760 was the " glacial " age of Massachusetts.' In early Virginia there never 

American Ideals 93 

was much of Freedom's light let in. Its early settlers were English Royalists, 
so-called Cavaliers, who were Episcopalian conformists, and dissent of any 
kind was prohibited by the severest penalties. The institution of slavery 
was established there before the expulsion of the Stuarts from England, and 
the slave trade was encouraged and maintained by British adventurers and 
Yankee skippers,* notwithstanding the protest of many of Virginia's most 
eminent men,' 

In New England, until the Scotch came, the sole guardians of liberty were 
the Separatists, the Quakers, and the Baptists. The first, because of their 
liberal views, were forced to remove from Massachusetts to Connecticut and 
Maryland, and the others were driven into Rhode Island and New Jersey. 
In the central colonies, those who kept alive the sacred flame were found at 
first in Maryland, but later chiefly in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, 
where the Quakers had early settled and where afterwards came the Mo- 
ravians, the Lutherans, the Huguenots, the Catholics, and the Covenanters. 
These two colonies became the only secure retreats for all the persecuted of 
Europe, of Britain, of New England, and of the Episcopalian colonies of the 
South. 8 Here was the landing-place of more than three-fourths of the 
Protestant emigrants from Ireland, and here they lived, increased, spread 
out over the south and west, and carried into Maryland, Virginia, and the 
Carolinas their democratic principles of human equality, of the responsibility 
of the governor to the governed, and of the supremacy of conscience over 
all established forms of thought, government, or worship. 

It was not until a long time after the beginning of the present century 
that freedom of worship prevailed in Massachusetts. Up to the middle of 
the preceding one, it was not safe for a visiting Presbyterian minister to 
preach in that colony or in Connecticut. In 1740, a few Scotch-Irish 
families lived in Worcester. After infinite labor and pains, and with con- 
siderable sacrifice on their part, they began the erection of a small meeting- 
house within the confines of that village. The framework of the building 
had been reared, and the structure was being pushed to completion, when, 
one dark night, a body of citizens, representing the majesty of the State and 
the Puritan Church, secretly assembled before the partially erected build- 
ing. Having made all preparations, they began to demolish the structure, 
and before morning had razed it to the ground. The offensive Presbyte- 
rians were not permitted to rebuild, but were obliged to remove to the 
frontiers. These Scots, and their fellow-colonists in Londonderry, New 
Hampshire, gave to America Matthew Thornton, Hugh McCulloch, Salmon 
P. Chase, Charles Foster, George B. McClellan, Asa Gray, Horace Greeley, 
General John Stark, and perhaps, also, Henry Knox, the Boston bookseller, 
whom Washington so highly honored. Reverend Samuel Finley, a Scotch- 
Irish Presbyterian, afterwards president of Princeton College, was arrested 
and imprisoned in Connecticut in 1742-43, because he ventured to preach 
in that colony without an invitation from a minister of one of the established 

94 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

churches. Francis Makemie, the father of American Presbyterianism, 
was likewise arrested and imprisoned in New York, in 1707, because he 
held services in the city of that name as a Presbyterian minister. New 
Jersey, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, and Maryland were the only colonies 
in which there was any approach to freedom of worship during the first half 
of the eighteenth century. Down to the beginning of the Revolutionary 
period, Virginia was, if anything, more intolerant than Massachusetts. Dis- 
senting ministers were imprisoned there after the year 1760, according 
to Patrick Henry's reading of their bill of indictment, for "preaching the 
gospel of Jesus Christ." That State was the first, however, to adopt a 
constitution declaring for a total separation of Church and State ; and it 
was owing to the earnest fight against the intolerable inflictions of the old 
laws, a fight made chiefly by the Scotch-Irish composing the Presbytery of 
Hanover, 9 that, beginning in 1776, these laws were finally swept from the 
statute-books. In contrasting the New England and the Southern colonies, 
Mr. Douglas Campbell points out the racial differences in their respective 
populations, and thus reveals the true reason for the differences in their 
treatment of the matter of religious liberty. He says 10 : 

The New England Colonies were republics, but not democracies. Most 
of them had state churches ; their suffrage, though broad, was restricted, 
and among their people social distinctions were very marked. When these 
colonies became States they clung, with true English tenacity, to their old 
traditions, and looked with horror upon the levelling democratic theories 
advanced in other quarters. In the South, on the other hand, with its large 
and influential Scotch-Irish population, the natural tendency was to get as far 
as possible from the past. These men hated England as the New Engend- 
ers never did, and they also hated all her institutions. Their religion had 
taught them the absolute equality of man, and on this point they were in 
full accord with men like Jefferson, who had learned the same principle 
from the philosophers of France. Here, then, in this difference of race we 
may perhaps find an explanation of the fact that Virginia, formerly the most 
aristocratic, became the most democratic in theory of all the States ; while 
Massachusetts, standing on old conservative ways, became the chief expo- 
nent of the opposing theories. One thing is very clear — from no English 
element of the population, except the Separatists, would have come the ideas 
of human equality, freedom of religion, separation of Church and State, and 
universal suffrage. 

Peculiarly appropriate to the consideration of these questions are the 
lectures delivered by Charles Francis Adams, at Cambridge, in 1893, which 
have since been published in an enlarged form, under the title of Massa- 
chusetts : Its Historians and Its History. Some of Mr. Adams's observations 
may be cited here : 

So far as the principles of civil liberty and human right are concerned, 
Massachusetts has always been at the front. . . . The backbone of the 
movement which preceded the French Revolution, she inspired the agitation 
which ended in the fall of African slavery. 

American Ideals 


Such has been the Massachusetts record as respects equality before the 
law ; as respects religious toleration, it has been of a character wholly- 
different. Upon that issue, indeed, not only has Massachusetts failed to 
make herself felt, but her record as a whole, and until a comparatively recent 
period, has been scarcely even creditable. This, too, was the case from the 

The story opens with the contested charter election of 1637, as a result 
of which Governor John Winthrop replaced Governor Sir Harry Vane as 
chief executive of the colony. This election took place ... on the 27th 
day of May. Four months later it was followed by the gathering of the first 
Synod of Massachusetts churches. . . . The Synod sat through twenty- 
four days, during which it busied itself unearthing heterodox opinions and 
making the situation uncomfortable for those suspected of heresy. . . . 
Finally . . . took place the trial of the arch-heretic, Mistress Anne 
Hutchinson ; and on the 18th of November, 1637, she was condemned to 

As the twig is bent, the tree inclines. The Massachusetts twig was here 
and then bent ; and, as it was bent, it during hard upon two centuries 
inclined. The question of Religious Toleration was, so far as Massachusetts 
could decide it, decided in 1637 in the negative. On that issue Massa- 
chusetts then definitely and finally renounced all claim or desire to head the 
advancing column, or even to be near the head of the column ; it did not go 
to the rear, but it went well towards it, and there it remained until the issue 
was decided. But it is curious to note from that day to this how the exponents 
of Massachusetts polity and thought, whether religious or historical, have, 
so to speak, wriggled and squirmed in the presence of the record. . . . 
They did so in 1637, when they were making the record up ; they have done 
so ever since. There was almost no form of sophistry to which the founders 
of Massachusetts did not have recourse then, — for they sinned against light, 
though they deceived themselves while sinning ; and there is almost no form 
of sophistry to which the historians of Massachusetts have not had recourse 
since, — really deceiving themselves in their attempt to deceive others. . . . 

The first decision, and the policy subsequently pursued in accordance 
with it, were distinct, authoritative, and final, — against religious toleration. 
. . . The offence, as well as the policy to be pursued by the government, 
was explicitly and unmistakably set forth by the chief executive and the 
presiding official at the trial of Mrs. Hutchinson, when Governor Winthrop 
said to her, — " Your course is not to be suffered ; . . . we see not that any 
should have authority to set up any other exercises besides what authority 
hath already set up." . . . 

I have cited Urian Oakes, President of Harvard College from 1675 to 
1681. He was succeeded by Increase Mather, who was President from 1685 
to 1 701 ; and in 1685 Increase Mather thus delivered himself on the subject 
of religious liberty : 

" Moreover, sinful Toleration is an evil of exceeding dangerous conse- 
quence : Men of Corrupt minds though they may plead for Toleration, and 
Cry up Liberty of Conscience, etc., yet if once they should become numerous 
and get power into their hands, none would persecute more than they. . . . 
And indeed the Toleration of all Religions and Perswasions, is the way to 
have no true Religion at all left. ... I do believe that Antichrist hath not 
at this day a more probable way to advance his Kingdom of Darkness, than 
by a Toleration of all Religions and Perswasions." (A Call to the Rising 
Generation, 1685, pp. 107, 108.) . . . 

96 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

So far as America is concerned, it is greatly to be feared that we in the 
matter of historical work are yet in the filio-pietistic and patriotic stage of 
development. " Ancestor worship " is the rule, and an excellent illustration 
of the results to which that worship leads those given to it is afforded in the 
treatment which has been accorded to that portion of the Massachusetts 
record which relates to religious toleration. It is not too much to say that 
the resources of sophistry and special pleading have been exhausted in the 
attempt to extenuate or explain it away. On its face it presents difficulties 
of an obvious nature : wholesale proscription ; frequent banishment under 
penalty of death in case of return ; the infliction of punishments both cruel 
and degrading, amounting to torture, and that regardless of the sex of those 
punished ; the systematic enforcement of rigid conformity through long 
periods of time ; — all these things are part of the record : — and in these 
bad respects it is not at once apparent how the Massachussets record differs 
from those of Spain or France or England. But the Massachusetts school 
of historians, undismayed by the difficulties which confronted it, has ad- 
dressed itself to the task in such a blind sense of filial devotion that the 
self-deception of many, and not the least eminent of those composing the 
school, has been complete. It is not pleasant to have such remarks made, 
but there is a certain justice in Sir Henry Maine's reference, to " the nauseous 
grandiloquence of the American panegyrical historian " (Popular Govern- 
ment^ p. 222) ; and J. A. Doyle might have extended his criticism of the 
early New England chroniclers, — that in reading their writings "we are 
reading not a history but a hagiology," — so as to include not a few later 
investigators. . . . 

Again, approaching a yet larger question, — the question of Toleration. 
Confronted with the record on that matter, the Massachusetts historian, so 
free and frank in his denunciation of English and Italian and Spanish 
ecclesiastical bigotry and intolerance, proceeds to argue that, after all, " re- 
ligious intolerance, like every other public restraint, is criminal wherever it 
is not needful for the public safety : it is simply self-defence whenever 
toleration would be public ruin." (Palfrey, History of New England, 1864, 
i., 300.) These words from the latest and most elaborate history of New 
England sound like an echo, — loud, reverberating, close at hand, — of the 
utterance of two centuries before. Thus Increase Mather, later president of 
Harvard College, expressed himself in 1681 : "The place may sometimes 
make a great alteration, as to indulgence to be expected. It is evident, that 
that Toleration is in one place not only lawful, but a necessary duty, 
which in another place would be destructive, and the expectation of it 
irrational." . . . 

The stronger and more stimulating the food, the sooner any undue quan- 
tity of it is felt ; until, in the case of wine, while a carefully measured use 
may stimulate the healthy and nourish the sick, excess brings on fever and 
delirium. Rhode Island went through this experience in its early days. It 
was, so to speak, the dumping-ground for the surplus intellectual activity of 
New England. . . . Thus what was a good and most necessary element 
in the economy of nature and the process of human development was an 
excess in Rhode Island ; and the natural result followed, — a disordered 
community. . . . But it by no means followed that what disordered infant 
Rhode Island would have proved more than a healthy stimulant for larger 
and more matured Massachusetts. In its spirit of rigid conformity, Massa- 
chusetts rejected and expelled whatever did not immediately assimilate ; 
and so did Spain. Indeed, Spain regarded Holland much as Massachusetts 

American Ideals 97 

regarded Rhode Island . . . the only trouble was that while Massachusetts 
did not have enough of the stimulant, Rhode Island had too much. ... 

But, as I have observed, this fact the inhabitants of Massachusetts could 
not see then, and the Massachusetts school of historians has refused to see 
it since. Those composing that school have systematically narrowed their 
vision ; and denouncing the rulers of Spain and France and England for 
bigotry, intolerance, and cruelty, — shutting their eyes to Holland . . . they 
have pointed to Rhode Island as an example of what must inevitably have 
ensued had the rulers of Massachusetts in its formative period not pursued 
that policy of which Philip II. was the great and only wholly successful ex- 
positor. In other words, they insist that in the seventeenth century toleration 
meant chaos, — " had our early ancestors . . . placed their government on 
the basis of liberty for all sorts of consciences, it would have been in that 
age a certain introduction of anarchy" (Ellis, Memorial History of Boston, 
i., 127) ; and in proof of this they point to Rhode Island. . . . 

It was not until after the adoption of the Federal Constitution in 1787 
that the political agitation which for Massachusetts began in 1760 can be 
said to have practically subsided. . . . During that period, nearly the life- 
time of a generation, the glacial mass of superstition and terrorism had been 
gradually but imperceptibly receding and disappearing. It was still potent, 
but in an inert sort of way. . . . When the constitution of 1780 was framed, 
it yielded a grudging and reluctant consent to limited concessions of non- 
conformity ; but it was then so potent and so rife that the framer of the 
instrument abandoned in despair the attempt to put his idea of religious 
freedom in any form of words likely to prove acceptable to those who were 
to pass upon his work ( Works of yohn Adams \ iv., p. 222, n.). . . . 

The phase of political activity has already been alluded to. In that field 
Massachusetts was always at home — it enjoyed an easy American supremacy 
which even its ice age did not wholly arrest. And now, when the struggle 
against superstition had drawn to a close, that against caste came again to 
the front, with Massachusetts still in the van. Indeed, on this issue, in 1837 
as in 1635, the proper and natural place for the Puritan commonwealth was 
in the van. It stood there ; indeed it was the van. 

The record, opened at Plymouth in December, 1620, closed as a distinct 
and independent record in April, 1865. That long struggle for the recog- 
nition of the equality of man before the law, of which Massachusetts was the 
peculiar and acknowledged champion, came to its close at Appomattox. 

Frank and novel, indeed, are these confessions of Puritan shortcom- 
ing from a scion of one of New England's most noted families. While 
one cannot but feel that Mr. Adams has rendered an inestimable service to 
the cause of truth, it is yet to be questioned whether in his concluding 
sentences he does not himself fall under the filio-pietistic influence when 
speaking of the Massachusetts monopoly of the principles of civil liberty. 
Claiming descent from John Cotton, as Mr. Adams does, it is not strange 
that the inquiry arises whether the fact of that descent, and the desire to 
condone the bigotry of that ancestor, may not have led him to take a broader 
and more philosophical survey of the subject of religious liberty in New 
England than has been taken by any of his predecessors. It may also be 
questioned whether his estimate as to the perniciousness of the early Puritan 

gS The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

ecclesiastical system may not have been reached through a realization of 
the inadequacy of any other conclusion to rightly explain the Jesuitical 
polity developed and practised by that Puritan ancestor. John Cotton was 
a man who argued that, " to excommunicate an Heretick, is not to perse- 
cute ; that is, it is not to punish an innocent, but a culpable and damnable 
person, and that not for conscience, but for persisting in error against light 
of conscience, whereof it hath been convinced." " 

Would that some equally worthy descendant of John Winthrop or Ed- 
mund Andros might give us a like demagnetized and impartial account of 
the history of civil liberty in Massachusetts. 

Lacking this, we have, however, from an outside source, a very clear 
and forceful criticism of those portions of Mr. Adams's addresses which 
partake of tendencies the opposite of the liberal ones just indicated. This 
criticism is to be found in Oliver Perry Temple's little volume on The 
Covenanter, Cavalier, and Puritan™ and is as follows : 

The truth is, from the beginning " caste " was in higher favor and more 
regarded in this [Massachusetts] than in any of the Colonies, except possibly 
in Virginia. The distinction between the " better class " — those " above the 
ordinary degree " — and those of " mean condition," was expressly pointed 
out and declared by the General Court in 165 1. Under the law enacted by 
it, regulating the kind of dress to be worn, and other things, magistrates, 
civil and military officers, persons of education and employment " above the 
ordinary degree," those who were worth two hundred pounds, and those 
whose estates had been considerable, but had decayed, — all those in a word 
called the better class, were exempt from the operation of these sumptuary 
laws. But the court declared most earnestly, almost pathetically, its " utter 
detestation and dislike that men or women of mean condition, educations, 
and callings, should take upon them the garbe of gentlemen, by the wearing 
of gold or silver lace, or buttons or poynts at their knees, to walke in great 
bootes ; or women of the same ranke to weare silk or tiffany hoodes or 
scarfes, which, though allowable to persons of greater estates, or more lib- 
eral education, yet we cannot but judge it intolerable in persons of such like 
condition." (Bryant's History of the United States, vol. ii., 63.) 

Most reluctantly do I attempt to take from " Puritan Massachusetts" 
any of the honors she so gracefully and complacently wears, won in the long 
contest over the abolition of slavery, but the truth of history compels my 
doing so. That State was not " in the van " ; much less " was she the van " 
on that question until after 1836. The leading men of Virginia condemned 
the institution of slavery both before and immediately after the Revolution. 
In 1804 a number of Baptist ministers in Kentucky started a crusade 
against the institution, which resulted in a hot contest in the denomination, 
and the organization of the " Baptist Licking Locust Association Friends of 
Humanity." In 1806 Charles Osborne began to preach "immediate eman- 
cipation " in Tennessee. Ten years later he started a paper in Ohio, called 
the Philanthropist, devoted to the general cause of humanity. In 1822 a 
paper was started at Shelbyville (no State mentioned, probably Kentucky), 
called the Abolition Intelligencer. 

Osborne probably went from Jefferson County, eastern Tennessee, the 

American Ideals 99 

same county from which John Rankin,* the noted abolitionist, went, since 
his was the first name on the roll of the " Lost Creek Manumission Society" 
of that county in 1815. 

Twenty years before Massachusetts took her stand at all on this subject, 
there were eighteen manumission, or emancipation, societies in eastern Ten- 
nessee, organized by the Covenanters, the Methodists, and the Quakers of 
that region, which held regular meetings for a number of years in the inter- 
est of emancipation or abolitionism. In 1822 there were five or six abolition 
societies in Kentucky. In 181 9 the first distinctively emancipation paper in 
the United States was published in Jonesborough, eastern Tennessee, by 
Elihu Embree, a Quaker, called the Manumission Intelligencer. In 1821 
Benjamin Lundy purchased this paper, and published it for two years in 
Greenville, East Tennessee, under the title of the Genius of Universal Eman- 
cipation. Lundy was merely the successor of Embree. At and previous 
to this time, the Methodist Church in Tennessee, at its conferences, was 
making it hot for its members who held or who bought or sold slaves, by 
silencing or expelling them. 

On the other hand, as late as 1835, William Lloyd Garrison was mobbed 
in the streets of Boston, because he was an abolitionist. About 1827, Ben- 
jamin Lundy could not find an abolitionist in that city. In 1826, of the 
one hundred and forty-three emancipation societies in the United States, 
one hundred and three were in the South, and not one, so far as I know, in 
Massachusetts. John Rankin, the noted abolitionist of Ohio, who went 
from East Tennessee in 1815 or 1816, — a Covenanter and from a Covenanter 
neighborhood, — declared in the latter part of his life that it was safer in 1816 
to 1820 to make abolition speeches in Tennessee or Kentucky than it was in 
the North. 

In 1833, the poet Whittier and George Thompson, the celebrated Eng- 
lish abolitionist, were mobbed and narrowly escaped with their lives, in at- 
tempting to make abolition speeches in one of the towns of Massachusetts.! 

In 1833, Governor Everett, of Massachusetts, suggested the expediency 
of prosecuting abolitionists. Mr. Garrison said, in the first number of the 
Liberator, that he found in the North " contempt more bitter, prejudice 
more stubborn, and apathy more frozen than among slave-owners them- 
selves." It was estimated, in 1828, that in Tennessee three-fifths of the 
people were favorably disposed toward the principle of emancipation. 

In the Constitutional convention of Tennessee, in 1834, a proposition 
was made to emancipate the slaves of the State, and it received over one- 
third of the votes of the members, and the favorable indorsement of all, 
those opposing it approving the principle, but insisting that the time for 
that step had not yet arrived. 

It is well known that Henry Clay commenced his political career in 
Kentucky by an effort to secure the emancipation of the slaves of that 
State. The fact is, the emancipation movement seems to have gotten its 
first start and strength in Virginia, Tennessee, and Kentucky, though the 
Quakers of Pennsylvania made feeble efforts in that direction before the 
Revolution. 18 

It thus appears that Massachusetts was a long way behind even some of 

♦John Rankin's father was a Pennsylvanian and was in the Revolutionary War. John 
was the founder of the Free Presbyterian Church and organized the first "underground 
railway " in Ohio. 

f This is likewise true of Benjamin Lundy, who first interested Garrison in abolition. 

ioo The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

the slave States in the struggle for "man's equality before the law." It was 
not until 1836 that she led in the abolition movement. 

From the very beginning, as we have seen, there has always been a ten- 
dency toward caste in Massachusetts. Her people were Englishmen. They 
had English ideas. Ideas of caste were a part of their heritage. I have al- 
ready quoted one of their early statutes showing that a clear distinction was 
drawn between the " better class," those " above the ordinary degree," and 
those of " mean condition." Those of the latter class were not to wear the 
same clothing that the former did. . . . 

I refer to one more fact on this subject. In the discussion over the for- 
mation of the Federal Constitution, and during the twelve years following 
its adoption, the Federal and the Anti-Federal parties were formed and came 
into being ; the one, thoroughly democratic, was led by Mr. Jefferson ; the 
other, led by Mr. Hamilton and John Adams, leaned toward a strong cen- 
tral government. Massachusetts and New England, following the lead of 
Mr. Adams, ranged themselves on the Federal side, while the Southern 
States followed the leadership of Mr. Jefferson. Massachusetts became a 
Federal State, while Virginia became thoroughly Democratic. 

As the logical conclusion of the discussions in the last four chapters, and 
the underlying thought running through them all, it is affirmed as almost an 
undeniable proposition that the advanced theories and the liberal ideas, in 
reference to both political and religious liberty, which, like threads of gold, 
were woven into the institutions of the country and the life of the people, 
and which gave them their chief glory, were of Covenanter, and not of Puri- 
tan or Cavalier, origin. This is so manifestly true as to religious liberty 
that the reader has only to recall the facts already given in order to com- 
mand his ready assent to the truth of the proposition. For it will be re- 
membered that until after the coming of the Covenanters there was not one 
gleam of light in all the dreary regions dominated by the Puritans and the 
Cavaliers. The despotism and the gloom of intolerance reigned supreme. 
A narrow bigotry and superstition cast their blighting shadows over the 
minds of men. Notwithstanding the bold and never-ceasing teachings of 
the Covenanters, from the day of their arrival in the country until they had 
aroused the storm of the Revolution, so difficult was it to induce the Puri- 
tans and the Cavaliers to relax their deadly grasp on the consciences of 
men that eleven years passed away after the inauguration of hostilities in 
the colonies before universal religious liberty prevailed in the Cavalier 
State, and nearly sixty years before complete religious emancipation was ac- 
complished in Massachusetts. 

The struggles for political and personal liberty are always easily remem- 
bered. The glare and the thunders of war are never forgotten. But the 
quiet, the persistent, and the courageous warfare waged by the Covenant- 
ers, everywhere and at all times, for the right of conscience, while it was 
effecting a revolution as important for the happiness of mankind as the 
great one settled by arms, did not appeal to the senses and the imagi- 
nation of men, and hence it has been but little noted by speakers or by 

To prove the correctness of the other branch of my summary, or propo- 
sition, in reference to political freedom, it is only necessary to refer to the 
facts already given, to show the deeply rooted ideas of caste and social dis- 
tinction existing in the minds of the ruling classes, and in the society of 
Virginia and Massachusetts, previous to and at the date of the Revolution. 
These caste ideas and social distinctions did not prevent those favorable to 

American Ideals 101 

Independence from doing their duty in the great contest of arms, but they 
did have a most important influence in shaping the institutions of the 
country, and in giving tone and coloring to its thought afterward. And in 
this second stage of the Revolution, these Covenanters, dwelling in large 
numbers in all the States south of New England, with their liberal and ad- 
vanced ideas, learned in their bitter experience of nearly two centuries, and 
with their creed of republicanism, were ready to infuse their spirit and in- 
ject their ideas of equality into the constitutions, the institutions, and into 
the life of that vast region. Under this influence even aristocratic Cavalier 
Virginia became, as we have seen, the most democratic of all the States. 
Under this influence, also, the constitution of Tennessee was framed, 
which was pronounced by Mr. Jefferson the most republican in its spirit of 
all the American constitutions. And this same spirit pervaded the institu- 
tions of all the Southern States, excepting South Carolina. I do not with- 
hold from Mr. Jefferson the high meed of praise he so richly merits for his 
magnificent work in behalf of liberal ideas and republican institutions in 
Virginia. But Mr. Jefferson was always a Covenanter in his opinions as to 
political and religious liberty.,, Besides this, we have seen that he would 
have failed in his great reforms, except for the powerful aid he received 
from the Covenanters. 

Nor do I ignore the teachings of Roger Williams, nor the liberal ideas of 
the Dutch of New York, nor the conservative opinions of the Quakers, nor 
the tolerant spirit of the Catholics of Maryland, in accomplishing these great 
results, but these were insignificant in their influence in comparison with the 
widely extended power of the great Covenanter race. 


1 See Alexander Johnston's " History of Parties," in Nar. and Crit. History of America, 
vol. vii., and Bryant's History of the United States. " Ministers of the Gospel would have a 
poor time of it if they must rely on a free contribution of the people for their maintenance. 
. . . The laws of the province [Massachusetts] having had the royal approbation to ratify 
them, they are the king's laws. By these laws it is enacted that there shall be public worship of 
God in every plantation ; that the person elected by the majority of inhabitants to be so, shall 
be looked upon as the minister of the place ; and that the salary for him, which they shall 
agree upon, shall be levied by a rate upon all the inhabitants. In consequence of this, the 
minister thus chosen by the people is (not only Christ's, but also) in reality the king's min- 
ister, and the salary raised for him is raised in the king's name, and is the king's allowance 
unto him." — Cotton Mather, Ratio Disciplines ; or, Faithful Account of the Discipline Pro- 
fessed and Practised in the Churches of New England, p. 20. 

2 " The constancy of the Quakers under their sufferings begot a pity and esteem for their 
persons, and an approbation of their doctrines ; their proselytes increased ; the Quakers 
returned as fast as they were banished ; and the fury of the ruling party was raised to such 
a height that they proceeded to the most sanguinary extremities. Upon the law they had 
made, they seized at different times upon five of those who had returned from banishment, 
condemned, and hanged them. It is unknown how far their madness had extended, if an 
order from the King and Council in England about the year 166 1 had not interposed to re- 
strain them. 

" It is a task not very agreeable to insist upon such matters ; but, in reality, things of this 
nature form the greatest part of the history of New England, for a long time. They per- 
secuted the Anabaptists, who were no inconsiderable body amongst them, with almost an equal 
severity. In short, this people, who in England could not bear being chastised with rods, 

102 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

had no sooner got free from their fetters than they scourged their fellow refugees with scor- 
pions ; though the absurdity, as well as the injustice of such a proceeding in them, might 
stare them in the face." — Burke, European Settlements in America, vol. ii., p. 151. 

3 Most of the States [at the time of Jefferson's inauguration] had had property qualifica- 
tions as limitations either on the right of suffrage or on the composition of the legislature. 
The Republican policy had been to remove such limitations in the States which they con- 
trolled, and to diminish the time of residence required for naturalization. The bulk of the 
new voters, therefore, went to them, and they were continually making their hold stronger 
on the States which had come under their control. New England and Delaware remained 
Federalist, and Maryland was doubtful ; the other States could be counted on almost cer- 
tainly as Republican. Under the New England system, governmental powers were prac- 
tically divided among a multitude of little town republics ; and restriction on the right of 
suffrage, intrenched in these towns, had to be conquered in a thousand successive strong- 
holds. The towns, too, sufficient to themselves, cared little for the exclusion from 
national life involved in their system ; and for nearly twenty years New England was 
excommunicated from national politics. It was not until the rise of manufactures and of 
dissenting sects had reinforced continuous agitation that the Republican revolution pene- 
trated New England and overcame the tenacious resistance of her people. — Alexander John- 
ston, " History of Parties," in Narrative and Critical History of America, vol. vii., p. 272. 

4 " Knox, under God, made the Scotch and the Scotch-Irish. . . . 

"Observe well, the influence of this prophetic patriot was felt most at St. Andrews, 
through the long Strathclyde, in the districts of Ayr, Dumfries, and Galloway, the Lothians 
and Renfrew. There exactly clustered the homes which thrilled to the herald voice of 
Patrick Hamilton ; there were the homes which drank in the strong wine of Knox ; there 
were the homes of tenacious memories and earnest fireside talk ; there were the homes 
which sent forth once and again the calm, shrewd, iron-nerved patriots who spurned as 
devil's lie the doctrine of ' passive resistance ' ; and there — mark it well — were the homes 
that sent their best and bravest to fill and change Ulster ; thence came in turn the Scotch- 
Irish of the Eaglewing ; thence came the settlers of Pennsylvania, Virginia, the Carolinas, 
Tennessee, and Kentucky ; and the sons of these men blush not as they stand beside the 
children of the Mayflower or the children of the Bartholomew martyrs. I know whereof 
I affirm. My peculiar education and somewhat singular work planted me, American-born, 
in the very heart of these old ancestral scenes ; and from parishioners who held with death- 
less grip the very words of Peden, Welsh, and Cameron, from hoary-headed witnesses in the 
Route of Antrim and on the hills of Down, have I often heard of the lads who went out to 
bleed at Valley Forge, — to die as victors on King's Mountain, — and stand in the silent 
triumph of Yorktown. We have more to thank Knox for than is commonly told to-day. 

" Here we reach our Welshes and Witherspoons, our Tennents and Taylors, our Calhouns 
and Clarks, our Cunninghams and Caldwells, our Pollocks, Polks, and Pattersons, our Scotts 
and Grays and Kennedys, our Reynoldses and Robinsons, our McCooks, McHenrys, McPher- 
sons, and McDowells. 

" But the man behind is Knox. Would you see his monument ? Look around. Yes : 
To this, our own land, more than any other, I am convinced must we look for the fullest 
outcome and the yet all unspent force of this more than royal leader, this masterful and 
moulding soul. . . . Carlyle has said : ' Scotch literature and thought, Scotch industry ; 
James Watt, David Hume, Walter Scott, Robert Burns. I find Knox and the Reforma- 
tion at the heart's core of every one of those persons and phenomena ; I find that without 
Knox and the Reformation, they would not have been. Or what of Scotland ? ' Yea, verily ; 
no Knox, no Watt, no Burns, no Scotland, as we know and love and thank God for : And 
must we not say no men of the Covenant ; no men of Antrim and Down, of Derry and 
Enniskillen ; no men of the Cumberland valleys ; no men of the Virginian hills ; no men of 
the Ohio stretch, of the Georgian glades and the Tennessee Ridge ; no rally at Scone ; no 

American Ideals 


thunders in St. Giles ; no testimony from Philadelphian Synod ; no Mecklenburg declara- 
tion ; no memorial from Hanover Presbytery ; no Tennent stirring the Carolinas ; no 
Craighead sowing the seeds of the coming revolution ; no Witherspoon pleading for the 
signing of our great charter ; and no such declaration and no such constitution as are ours, 
— the great Tilghman himself being witness in these clear words, never by us to be let die : 
' The framers of the Constitution of the United States were greatly indebted to the standards 
of the Presbyterian Church of Scotland in modelling that admirable document.' — Rev. John 
S. Mcintosh, Proceedings Scotch-Irish Society of America, vol. i., pp. 199-201. 

" In the history of Scotland, too, I can find properly but one epoch : we may say, it 
contains nothing of world-wide interest at all but this Reformation by Knox. A poor, bar- 
ren country, full of continual broils, dissensions, massacrings ; a people in the last state of 
rudeness and destitution, little better perhaps than Ireland at this day. Hungry, fierce bar- 
ons, 'not so much as able to form any arrangement with each other how to divide what they 
fleeced from these poor drudges ; but obliged, as the Columbian Republics are at this day, to 
make of every alteration a revolution ; no way of changing a ministry but by hanging the 
old ministers on gibbets : this is a historical spectacle of no very singular significance : 
4 Bravery ' enough, I doubt not ; fierce fighting in abundance : but not braver or fiercer 
than that of their old Scandinavian Sea-king ancestors ; whose exploits we have not found 
worth dwelling on ! It is a country as yet without a soul : nothing developed in it but what 
is rude, external, semi-animal. And now at the Reformation, the internal life is kindled, as 
it were, under the ribs of this outward material death. A cause, the noblest of causes, kindles 
itself, like a beacon set on high ; high as Heaven, yet attainable from Earth ; — whereby the 
meanest man becomes not a Citizen only, but a Member of Christ's visible Church ; a ver- 
itable Hero, if he prove a true man ! 

"This that Knox did for his nation, I say, we may really call a resurrection as from 
death. It was not a smooth business ; but it was welcome, surely, and cheap at that price, 
had it been far rougher. On the whole, cheap at any price ; — as life is. The people began 
to live: they needed first of all to do that, at what cost and costs soever. Scotch Literature 
and Thought, Scotch Industry ; James Watt, David Hume, Walter Scott, Robert Burns : I 
find Knox and the Reformation acting in the heart's core of every one of these persons and 
phenomena ; I find that without the Reformation they would not have been." — Thomas 
Carlyle, On Heroes and Hero Worship, iv. 

6 So much for the early clergy. As to the magistrates, in the mouths of James I. and 
Charles I., of Philip II. of Spain, or Louis XIV. of France, the words : "We see not that 
any should have authority to set up any other exercises besides what authority had already 
set up," — these words in those mouths would have had a familiar as well as an ominous 
sound. To certain of those who listened to them, they must have had a sound no less 
ominous when uttered by Governor John Winthrop in the Cambridge meeting-house on the 
17th of November, 1637. In them was definitely formulated and clearly announced the 
policy thereafter to be pursued in Massachusetts. It was thereafter pursued in Massachusetts. 
John Winthrop, John Endicott, and Thomas Dudley were all English Puritans. As such 
they had sought refuge from authority in Massachusetts. On what ground can the impartial 
historian withhold from them the judgment he visits on James and Philip and Charles and 
Louis ? The fact would seem to be that the position of the latter was logical though cruel ; 
while the position of the former was cruel and illogical. — C. F. Adams, Massachusetts : Its 
Historians and Its History, p. 38. 

6 See letter of Col. William Byrd, written from Virginia to Lord Egmont, July 12, 1730, 
printed in American Historical Review for October, 1895, vol. i., p. 88 ; also, W. E. B. 
DuBois, The Suppression of the African Slave -Trade to the United States of America, 
1638-1870, chapter iv. {Harvard Historical Studies, vol. i.). 

'Bancroft, vol. ii., pp. 276-279, 549, 550; vol. iii., pp. 410-413; vol. iv., p. 34; vol. 
v., p, 329. 

104 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

" I have found no mention of negroes in the colony until about 1650. The first brought 
here as slaves were in a Dutch ship ; after which the English commenced the trade, and con- 
tinued it until the Revolutionary War. That suspended, ipso facto, their further importation 
for the present, and the business of the war pressing constantly on the Legislature, this sub- 
ject was not acted on finally until the year '78, when I brought in a bill to prevent their 
further importation. This passed without opposition, and stopped the increase of the evil 
by importation, leaving to future efforts its final eradication. In 1769 I became a member 
of the Legislature by the choice of the county in which I lived, and so continued until it was 
closed by the Revolution. I made one effort in that body for the permission of the emanci- 
pation of slaves, which was rejected ; and indeed, during the regal government nothing 
liberal could expect success." — Jefferson's Autobiography, pp. 3, 38. 

8 " In 1681, William Penn received from Charles II. a grant of the Province of Pennsyl- 
vania, including what is now the State of Delaware. Penn's mother was a Dutch woman 
from Rotterdam, and one very prominent in her generation. His peculiar religious ideas, 
as we have already seen, were derived from his mother's country. He travelled extensively 
in Holland, and spoke the language so well that he preached to the Dutch Quakers in their 
native tongue. Finally, before coming to America, he took up his residence for some time 
at Emden, in democratic East Friesland. Under all these influences, he sat down in 1682, 
and prepared a " Frame of Government " for his dominion, and a " Code of Laws," which 
was afterwards adopted by the General Assembly. In their preparation he was assisted by 
Algernon Sidney, who had lived many years upon the Continent, who was perfectly familiar 
with the institutions of the Netherland Republic and on most intimate terms with its leading 
statesmen. How much they borrowed from Holland we shall see hereafter. [The registra- 
tion of land titles ; that all prisons should be workhouses for felons, vagrants, etc. , and 
should be free to others as to fees, board, and lodgings ; that landed estate should be liable 
for a descendant's debt (one-third in cases where issue was left); that one-third the estate of 
a murderer passed to the next of kin of his victim ; that all children in the province over the 
age of twelve were to be taught a trade ; religious toleration.] 

" With Pennsylvania, we reach the most southern point to which a Dutch influence upon 
the early settlers of America can be traced, as we also reach the limit of the colonies whose 
institutions, except that of slavery, have affected the American Commonwealth. Virginia 
alone contributed an idea, that of the natural equality of man ; but this was borrowed by her 
statesmen from the Roman law. 

"One fact in connection with the Southern colonies, which in early days were almost 
wholly under an English influence, is very significant. In 1669, John Locke, with the aid 
of the Earl of Shaftesbury, prepared a frame of government for Carolina. None of the pro- 
visions of this constitution, except that for recording deeds and mortgages, were borrowed 
from Holland, and not one of them, with this exception, has found a permanent place among 
American Institutions. The Puritans in Holland, England, and America, vol. ii., pp. 418- 
420 (by permission of Messrs. Harper & Brothers). 

9 This Presbytery furnished 10,000 names to a petition, which was the force back of 
Jefferson's bill for religious freedom (1785), an enactment of which he was so proud that he 
had a statement of the fact that he was its author engraved upon his tombstone. The peti- 
tion is printed herein as Appendix F. 

10 The Puritan in Holland, England, and A m erica, vol. ii., p. 502. 

11 Cotton's " Answer to Williams," Narragansett Club Publications, vol. iii., pp. 48-49 ; 
also vol. ii., p. 27. 

12 See Appendix L (Tithes in Ulster.) 

13 The first printed protest in America against slavery, issued by Rev. George Keith, a 
Scotch Quaker, October 13, 1693, and published at New York by William Bradford, is re- 
produced in the Pennsylvania Magazine, vol. xiii., pp. 265-270. 



IT may seem a reiteration of the words of Mr. Henry Thomas Buckle to 
say that the history of Scotland during the century and a half from 1550 
to 1700 is almost completely merged in the history of the Scottish Church. 1 
He who would form a just conception of the forces in operation in that 
country, during the period when the Middle Ages passed away and the mod- 
ern era began, must study them chiefly in connection with their bearing on 
religion. But it will not suffice in such an investigation to assume that 
ecclesiasticism means religion. In his elaborate and, in some respects, highly 
philosophical analysis of civilization in Scotland, 2 it seems to the writer that 
Mr. Buckle has failed to reach a wholly true and satisfactory estimate of 
Scottish character, and that in just so far as he has neglected to discriminate 
in this regard. It is true he approaches the subject from the logical English 
point of view. Looking upon the institution of the Church with strictly utili- 
tarian eyes, he fails to perceive the spiritual life of its people, of which the 
Church in Scotland may in all seriousness be considered merely the medium 
of expression. Long accustomed by heredity, training, and experience to 
the ecclesiastical system at home, which, even down to his own time, was wont 
to administer to its adherents only such theological pabulum as would nour- 
ish doctrines according with the views and vices of its reigning head, it is at 
least not surprising that the great mind which produced the Introduction to 
the History of Civilization in England should fail to strike the keynote of 
that part of its theme which relates to North Britain. Nor can it be greatly 
wondered at, in view of the history of the English Church establishment, 
that one of its native observers should formulate a judgment against the re- 
ligious system of the neighboring country, finding evidences in it of the same 
spirit which dominated the Church at home, and denouncing it as the chief 
hindrance to its country's progress ; even though in so doing his gravest 
charge against the Scottish Church is, that its votaries have too much super- 
stitious reverence for God and the Bible. 

It will ever be a matter of regret that Mr. Buckle passed away just as he 
had fairly entered upon the prosecution of his great work. Still more is it to 
be regretted that he died before the full promulgation of our modern theories 
of science and philosophy. Had he lived to-day it is not unlikely that his 
name would have been linked with that of Herbert Spencer, and his meth- 
ods in historical analysis become analogous in nature and merit to those of 
that master-thinker in matters of speculative philosophy. He might, in 
some respects, have excelled that philosopher had he enjoyed the fuller 
knowledge of the present day instead of beginning to unfold and develop 
his theories of the philosophy of history by the light of the first fitful and 


106 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

half-clouded rays of forty years ago. In that event, being a student of history, 
it is possible Buckle might have taken a different view of the part religion 
has played in the progress of the world from that expressed in his work. He 
might, also, afterwards have based his theory as to Scottish progress or retro- 
gression upon a different premise from the one which he has used. Whether 
he would have done so or not, however, it is reasonably certain that, if living 
to-day, he would have seen a gradual change of public opinion between the 
years 1861 and 1900 as to the correctness of his original hypothesis. Nor 
could he have failed to perceive a slowly growing conviction on the part of 
fair-minded thinkers — a conviction that, after all, some of the chief ele- 
ments of human progress are bound up with the phenomena of religion; that 
human nature does not reach its highest development under a strictly intel- 
lectual standard of morality ; that human reason is not yet sufficiently acute 
to classify, much less to harmonize, the incongruities of daily life and expe- 
rience ; in short, that the permanency of nations and the endurance of the 
race itself depends not so much upon intellectual development as upon the 
cultivation, to a greater or less extent, of those restraining influences of 
religion which the able author of the History of Civilization in England has 
denominated a " mixture of wonder and fear." 3 

Mr. Buckle has failed to grasp the one salient point necessary for a right 
understanding of the history of religion and its effects in Scotland. Or, 
noting the results of a certain moving cause, he has so clouded and distorted 
the evidences of its presence that we can only reach a true apprehension of 
the cause by reasoning backward from his luminous and eulogistic summary 
of its effect. 

This cause or principle of action in the Scottish people, the workings of 
which have been so beneficial to the growth of human liberty and to man's 
progress, this divine afflatus which Mr. Buckle seeks to stigmatize by the use 
of that much-abused term " superstition," and to classify as an emanation 
from the caverns of darkness and ignorance, is the principle of conscience. 
It is this which is the guiding light of the Scottish soul and intellect. With- 
out the full and just recognition of its pervading influence among that people, 
it were vain for us to attempt to read aright the lessons of Scottish history ; 
and idle to seek for explanation of the reasons for Scottish pre-eminence, of 
which we see so many proofs in the mental and material subjugation of the 

Probably the most noticeable instance of the blindness of the author of 
the History of Civilization in England is afforded in the conclusion reached 
by him in the following passage 4 : 

By this union of ignorance with danger, the clergy had, in the fifteenth 
century, obtained more influence in Scotland than in any other Euro- 
pean country, Spain alone excepted. And as the power of the nobles had 
increased quite as rapidly, it was natural that the Crown, completely over- 
shadowed by the great barons, should turn for aid to the Church. During 

The Scottish Kirk 107 

the fifteenth century and part of the sixteenth, this alliance was strictly pre- 
served, and the political history of Scotland is the history of a struggle by 
the kings and clergy against the enormous authority of the nobles. The con- 
test, after lasting about one hundred and sixty years, was brought to a close 
in 1560, by the triumph of the aristocracy and the overthrow of the Church. 
With such force, however, had the circumstance just narrated engrained 
superstition into the Scotch character, that the spiritual classes quickly ral- 
lied, and, under their new name of Protestants they became as formidable as 
under their old name of Catholics. . . . The great Protestant movement 
which, in other countries, was democratic, was, in Scotland, aristocratic. We 
shall also see, that, in Scotland, the Reformation, not being the work of the peo- 
ple, has never produced the effects which might have been expected from it, and 
which it did produce in England. It is, indeed, but too evident that, while in 
England Protestantism has diminished superstition, has weakened the 
clergy, has increased toleration, and, in a word, has secured the triumph of 
secular interests over ecclesiastical ones, its result in Scotland has been 
entirely different ; and that in that country the Church, changing its form 
without altering its spirit, not only cherished its ancient pretensions but un- 
happily retained its ancient power ; and that, although that power is now 
dwindling away, the Scotch preachers still exhibit, whenever they dare, an 
insolent and domineering spirit, which shows how much real weakness there 
yet lurks in the nation, where such extravagant claims are not immediately 
silenced by the voice of loud and general ridicule. 

The inadequacy and perniciousness of Mr. Buckle's conception of the 
real bearing of religion upon the national life and character of the Scottish 
people cannot perhaps be better shown than by such a disingenuous state- 
ment as this. In it he deliberately ignored the facts, and falsified and reversed 
the verdict of modern history. Messrs. Freeman and Gardiner, in their 
sketch of English history contained in a recent edition of the standard ref- 
erence manual of Great Britain, 6 only voice the opinion of all honest stu- 
dents when they say: 

The English Reformation then, including in that name the merely ecclesi- 
astical changes of Henry as well as the more strictly religious changes of 
the next reign, was not in its beginning either a popular or a theological 
movement. In this it differs from the Reformation in many continental 
countries, and especially from the Reformation in the northern part of 
Britain. The Scottish Reformation began much later ; but, when it began, 
its course was far swifter and fiercer. That is to say, it was essentially popular 
and essentially theological. The result was, that, of all the nations which 
threw off the dominion of the Roman See, England, on the whole, made the 
least change, while Scotland undoubtedly made the most. (On the whole, 
because, in some points of sacramental doctrine and ritual, the Lutheran 
churches, especially in Sweden, have made less change than the Church of 
England has. But nowhere did the general ecclesiastical system go on with 
so little change as it did in England.) In England change began from 
above. . . . The small party of theological reform undoubtedly welcomed 
the changes of Henry, as being likely in the end to advance their own cause ; 
but the mass of the nation was undoubtedly favorable to Henry's system of 
Popery without the Pope. 

108 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

On the same subject, Green says 8 : 

Knox had been one of the followers of Wishart ; he had acted as pastor 
to the Protestants who after Beaton's murder held the Castle of St. Andrews, 
and had been captured with them by a French force in the summer of 1547. 
The Frenchmen sent the heretics to the galleys ; and it was as a galley slave 
in one of their vessels that Knox next saw his native shores. . . . Re- 
leased at the opening of 1549, Knox found shelter in England, where he 
became one of the most stirring among the preachers of the day, and was 
offered a bishopric by Northumberland. Mary's accession drove him again 
to France. But the new policy of the Regent now opened Scotland to the 
English refugees, and it was as one of these that Knox returned in 1555 to 
his own country. Although he soon withdrew to take charge of the English 
congregations at Frankfort and Geneva, his energy had already given a deci- 
sive impulse to the new movement. In a gathering at the house of Lord 
Erskine he persuaded the assembly to " refuse all society with idolatry, and 
bind themselves to the uttermost of their power to maintain the true preach- 
ing of the Evangile, as God should offer to their preachers an opportunity." 
The confederacy woke anew the jealousy of the government, and persecu- 
tion revived. But some of the greatest nobles now joined the reforming 
cause. The Earl of Morton, the head of the house of Douglas, the Earl of 
Argyle, the greatest chieftain of the west, and above all a bastard son of the 
late King, Lord James Stuart, who bore as yet the title of Prior of St. 
Andrews, but who was to be better known afterwards as the Earl of Murray, 
placed themselves at the head of the movement. The remonstrances of 
Knox from his exile at Geneva stirred them to interfere in behalf of the 
persecuted Protestants ; and at the close of 1557 these nobles united with 
the rest of the Protestant leaders in an engagement which became memor- 
able as the first among those Covenants which were to give shape and color 
to Scotch religion. 

" We," ran this solemn bond, " perceiving how Satan in his members, the 
Antichrists of our time, cruelly doth rage, seeking to overthrow and to 
destroy the Evangel of Christ, and His Congregation, ought according to 
our bounden duty to strive in our Master's cause even unto the death, being 
certain of our victory in Him. The which our duty being well considered, 
we do promise before the Majesty of God and his Congregation that we, by 
His grace, shall with all diligence continually apply our whole power, sub- 
stance, and our very lives to maintain, set forward, and establish the most 
blessed Word of God and His Congregation, and shall labor at our possi- 
bility to have faithful ministers, purely and truly to minister Christ's Evangel 
and Sacraments to his people. We shall maintain them, nourish them, and 
defend them, the whole Congregation of Christ and every member thereof, 
at our whole power and wearing of our lives, against Satan and all wicked 
power that does intend tyranny or trouble against the foresaid Congregation. 
Unto the which Holy Word and Congregation we do join us, and also do 
forsake and renounce the congregation of Satan with all the superstitious 
abomination and idolatry thereof : and moreover shall declare ourselves 
manifestly enemies thereto by this our faithful promise before God, testified 
to His Congregation by our subscription at these presents." 

The Covenant of the Scotch nobles marked a new epoch in the strife of 
religions. Till now the reformers had opposed the doctrine of nationality to 
the doctrine of Catholicism. In the teeth of the pretensions which the 
Church advanced to a uniformity of religion in every land, whatever might 
be its differences of race or government, the first Protestants had advanced 


or J 
*$4M£20*r The Scottish Kirk 


the principle that each prince or people had alone the right to determine its 
form of faith and worship. " Cujus regio " ran the famous phrase which 
embodied their theory, "ejus religio." It was the acknowledgment of this 
principle that the Lutheran princes obtained at the Diet of Spires ; it was on 
this principle that Henry based his Act of Supremacy. Its strength lay in 
the correspondence of such a doctrine with the political circumstances of 
the time. It was the growing feeling of nationality which combined with the 
growing development of monarchical power to establish the theory that the 
political and religious life of each nation should be one, and that the religion 
of the people should follow the faith of the prince. Had Protestantism, as 
seemed at one time possible, secured the adhesion of all the European 
princes, such a theory might well have led everywhere as it led in England 
to the establishment of the worst of tyrannies, a tyranny that claims to lord 
alike over both body and soul. The world was saved from this danger by 
the tenacity with which the old religion still held its power. In half the 
countries of Europe the disciples of the new opinions had soon to choose 
between submission to their conscience and submission to their prince ; and 
a movement which began in contending for the religious supremacy of 
kings ended in those wars of religion which arrayed nation after nation 
against their sovereigns. In this religious revolution Scotland led the way. 
Her Protestantism was the first to draw the sword against earthly rulers. 
The solemn " Covenant " which bound together her " Congregation " in the 
face of the regency, which pledged its members to withdraw from all sub- 
mission to the religion of the State and to maintain in the face of the State 
their liberty of conscience, opened that vast series of struggles which ended 
in Germany with the Peace of Westphalia and in England with the Toleration 
Act of William the Third. 

The " Covenant " of the lords sounded a bold defiance to the Catholic 
reaction across the border. While Mary replaced the Prayer-book by the 
Mass, the Scotch lords resolved that wherever their power extended the 
Common Prayer should be read in all churches. While hundreds were going 
to the stake in England, the Scotch nobles boldly met the burning of their 
preachers by a threat of war. " They trouble our preachers," ran their bold 
remonstrance against the bishops in the Queen-mother's presence ; " they 
would murder them and us ! shall we suffer this any longer ? No, madam, 
it shall not be ! " and therewith every man put on his steel bonnet. 

The testimony of Froude is likewise equally direct and positive 7 : 

But in England the Reformation was more than half political. The 
hatred of priests and popes was more a predominant principle than specialty of 
doctrine. . . . What kings and Parliament had done in England, in Scot- 
land had to be done by the people, and was accompanied therefore with the 
passionate features of revolt against authority. . . . John Knox became 
thus the representative of all that was best in Scotland. He was no narrow 
fanatic, who, in a world in which God's grace was equally visible in a 
thousand creeds, could see truth and goodness nowhere but in his own for- 
mula. He was a large, noble, generous man, with a shrewd perception of 
actual fact, who found himself face to face with a system of hideous iniquity. 

Here, then, we have the direct refutation of Buckle's statements as to 
the origin of the Scottish Reformation, by four leading authorities on British 
history, and their opinions are merely confirmatory of the judgment of all 
observing and unprejudiced men. 

1 10 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

Much in the same line with Mr. Buckle's theory of the origin and accom- 
plishment of the Reformation in Scotland is the oft-repeated assertion that the 
Scottish Church was as relentless and unceasing a persecutor of dissenters as 
were those of the Papacy or Episcopacy. 8 This assertion, likewise, is not 
sustained by the facts. Bigoted and intolerant as the Scottish Church became 
after it was made a part of the machinery of State, its methods were mild 
and innocuous compared with those of its rivals. 9 The one solitary case 
where death was inflicted by the authorities for heresy, at the instigation or 
with the approval of the Kirk, was that of Thomas Aikenhead, who was 
hanged in 1697 on the charge of atheism and blasphemy against God. 
While this was a wholly unjustifiable and villainous act of cruelty, it can 
hardly be classed with those persecutions from which the Presbyterians had 
suffered. It would seem to belong rather to that class of religious perversi- 
ties of which the most familiar example was the burning of witches. In 
this latter diabolism Scotland engaged with perhaps greater zest than either 
England or Massachusetts. The distinction between the crime of the 
hanging of Thomas Aikenhead and that of the burning of George Wishart, 
by the Catholics, or the drowning of Margaret Wilson, by the Episcopalians, 
therefore, is probably to be found by a contrast of motive rather than of de- 
gree ; at most it is the difference between fanaticism and tyranny. In the 
latter cases, the sufferers had denied the authority of the bishops. These 
prelates aimed at preferment by mixing politics with religion, and could not 
be wholly sincere or disinterested. George Wishart and Margaret Wilson were 
slain by them because the bishops could brook no limitations upon their own 
power. In the case of Thomas Aikenhead, the authority of God had been 
questioned, and the fanatical zealotry of the ministers permitted the applica- 
tion of John Cotton's law, without the apparent intervention of any personal 
motives. 10 If such a distinction should at first appear too finely drawn, an ex- 
amination of the workings of the two principles thus suggested will show that 
their results are, as a rule, widely different. Indeed, in some aspects, their 
dissimilarity is almost of equal extent and correspondence with that existing 
between the two churches of North and South Britain; and the divergence of 
their ends but little short of that which marks the two opposite principles of 
democracy and despotism. In New England, where the Calvinistic theory 
of the supremacy of God and the Bible over man's conscience was at first as 
fully carried out as in Scotland, a system of democracy was inaugurated 
which, until its progress became retarded by the union of Church and State, 
reached a higher degree of perfection than had been the case in any other 
English community. This system, but for the entrance and long-continued 
presence of the fatally defective policy of ecclesiastical usurpation in secular 
affairs, might have developed into an ideal form of government. In Old 
England, on the contrary, where the authority of the bishops over man's con- 
science was ever maintained and the theory fully developed by Laud and 
Sharp and the Stuarts, a highly despotic form of government resulted, from 

The Scottish Kirk in 

which mankind had occasionally to find relief by " blood-letting," as in the 
revolutions of 1638 and 1688. The only similarity apparent in the ultimate 
workings of these two principles, therefore, would seem to be that identi- 
cal results have sometimes been reached by the action of one and reaction 
from the other. 

No theological system has yet been devised that is able to sustain this 
dual relation — secular and spiritual — without deteriorating ; and the history 
of the Presbyterian Church in Scotland after 1690, when it became the estab- 
lished Church of the State, marks a rapid change in spirit and a steady 
decadence in spiritual power and influence, only paralleled, perhaps, by that 
of the kindred Church of New England after 1640. 

Charles II., at the time of his father's death, was a friendless fugitive. 
The Scotch offered to receive him as their king, on condition that he should 
pledge himself by oath to regard and preserve their Presbyterian form of 
Church government. To this he assented. When he arrived in the kingdom 
he subscribed the covenant ; and again at his coronation, under circum- 
stances of much more than usual solemnity, he swore to preserve it inviolate. 
The Scotch accordingly, armed in his defence ; but, divided among them- 
selves, and led by a general very unfit to cope with Cromwell, they were soon 
defeated, and Charles was again driven to the Continent. When he returned 
in 1660, he voluntarily renewed his promise to the Scotch, by whom his res- 
toration had been greatly promoted, not to interfere with the liberty of their 
Church. No sooner, however, was he firmly seated on his throne than all 
these oaths and promises were forgotten. Presbyterianism was at once 
abolished, and Episcopacy established ; not such as it was under James I. 
when bishops were little more than standing moderators of the Presbyteries, 
but invested, by the arbitrary mandate of the King, with the fulness of pre- 
latical power. An act was passed making it penal even to speak publicly or 
privately against the King's supremacy, or the government of the Church by 
archbishops and bishops. A court of high commission, of which all the pre- 
lates were members, was erected and armed with inquisitorial powers. Multi- 
tudes of learned and pious ministers were ejected from their parishes, and 
ignorant and ungodly men, for the most part, introduced in their stead. Yet 
the people were forced, under severe penalties, to attend the ministrations of 
these unworthy men. All ejected ministers were prohibited preaching or 
praying except in their own families ; and preaching or praying in the fields 
was made punishable with death. Any one, though the nearest relative, who 
should shelter, aid, or in any way minister to the wants of those denounced, 
was held liable to the same penalty as the person assisted. All landholders 
were required to give bond that their families and dependants should abstain 
from attending any conventicle. To enforce these wicked laws torture was 
freely used to extort evidence or confession ; families were reduced to ruin 
by exorbitant fines ; the prisons were filled with victims of oppression ; mul- 
titudes were banished and sold as slaves : women and even children were 

ii2 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

tortured or murdered for refusing to take an oath they could not under- 
stand ; soldiers were quartered upon the defenceless inhabitants and allowed 
free license ; men were hunted like wild beasts, and shot or gibbeted along 
the highways. Modern history hardly affords a parallel to the cruelty and 
oppression under which Scotland groaned for nearly thirty years. And 
what was the object of all this wickedness ? It was to support Episcopacy. 
It was done for the bishops, and, in a great measure, by them. They were 
the instigators and supporters of these cruel laws, and of the still more cruel 
execution of them. Is it any wonder, then, that the Scotch abhorred Episco- 
pacy ? It was in their experience identified with despotism, superstition, and 
irreligion. Their love of Presbyterianism was one with their love of liberty 
and religion. As the Parliament of Scotland was never a fair representation 
of the people, the General Assembly of their Church became their great 
organ for resisting oppression and withstanding the encroachments of their 
sovereigns. The conflict, therefore, which in England was so long kept 
up between the Crown and the House of Commons, was in Scotland sustained 
between the Crown and the Church. This was one reason why the Scotch 
became so attached to Presbyterianism ; this, too, was the reason why the 
Stuarts hated it, and determined at all hazards to introduce prelacy as an 
ally to despotism." 

The chief period of the so-called Presbyterian persecution in Scotland 
was that immediately succeeding the Revolution of 1688, when we do find 
a wholesale expulsion of the Episcopal clergy, and, so far as it could be done 
without the use of measures involving the loss of life and limb, an earnest 
attempt to suppress Episcopacy in Scotland. This, it should be remem- 
bered, was immediately at the close of a reign of terror which had existed in 
that country for twenty-five or thirty years, and was but the fuller carry- 
ing out for Scotland of the work of the Revolution. As the calling of the 
Prince of Orange and the expulsion of James II. was first made possible 
through the fear of Papacy on the part of the English, so the progress and 
success of the Revolution was finally assured only by the fixed determination 
of the Scots to rid themselves of Episcopacy, and to re-establish the popular 
religion which had been overthrown by Charles. They had infinitely greater 
cause to fear the bishops of the Anglican Church than their southern neigh- 
bors had to fear those of St. Peter's. They had suffered tenfold more from 
the oppressions of the British pope and his bishops than had the English 
from those of the pontiff of Rome. In the annals of religious persecution in 
the British Islands, the crimes of the Roman Catholic Church were but 
venial compared with the enormities perpetrated through the ambition and 
malignancy of the prelates and heads of the Established Church of England, 
by which the Scots were the chief sufferers. 13 

So far as Scotland was concerned, therefore, the benefits of the Revolu- 
tion, the success of which that country had rendered possible, would have 
been wholly lost to it, had the chief provoking cause been left unmolested 

The Scottish Kirk 


and entrenched in a position for working further harm to the cause of human 
liberty. All the legitimate arguments which may be made to justify the 
overthrow of papal authority in England, apply with thrice-augmented force 
to sustain the action of the Scottish people in breaking the wings of those 
ecclesiastical vampires who had been draining the life-blood of Scotland. 
Nay, the whole force of the argument in favor of the Protestant Reformation 
of Christendom must be broken before it can successfully be maintained that 
the action of the Scottish people in uprooting the Episcopal system was in- 
consistent with their professed devotion to the cause of religious liberty. 18 

The extent to which the cause of the Covenanters was bound up with 
that of human liberty and opposed to the united despotism of king and 
prelate may be shown by the reproduction of the celebrated Queensferry 
Paper, for their approval of the revolutionary sentiments of which so many 
of the Scottish martyrs suffered death. The substance of the contents of this 
document, and the accompanying account of its origin, are copied from the 
appendix to the Cloud of Witnesses (15th edition, pp. 343-348), as follows : 

A brief relation of the persecutions and death of that worthy gentleman, 
Henry Hall of Haughhead, who suffered martyrdom at Queensferry, 
June 3, 1680. 14 

Henry Hall of Haughhead, having had religious education, began early 
to mind a life of holiness ; and was of a pious conversation from his youth ; 
he was a zealous opposer of the public resolutions, insomuch that when the 
minister of the parish where he lived complied with that course, he refused 
to hear him, and went to Ancrum, to hear Mr. John Livingston. Being op- 
pressed with the malicious persecutions of the curates and other malignants 
for his nonconformity with the profane courses of abomination, that com- 
menced at the unhappy restoration of that most wicked tyrant Charles II. 
he was obliged to depart his native country, and go over the border into Eng- 
land in the year 1665, where he was so much renowned for his singular zeal 
in propagating the gospel among the people, who before his coming among 
them were very rude and barbarous ; but many of them became famous for 
piety after. In the year 1666, he was taken in his way to Pentland, coming 
to the assistance of his convenanted brethren, and was imprisoned with some 
others in Sessford castle, but by the divine goodness he soon escaped thence 
through the favour of the Earl of Roxburgh, to whom the castle pertained, 
the said earl being his friend and relation ; from which time, till about the 
year 1679, he lived peaceably in England, much beloved of all that knew him, 
for his concern in propagating the knowledge of Christ in that country ; in- 
somuch that his blameless and shining christian conversation, drew reverence 
and esteem from his very enemies. But about the year 1678, the heat of the 
persecution in Scotland obliging many to wander up and down through 
Northumberland and other places ; one colonel Struthers intended to seize 
any Scotsman he could find in those parts ; and meeting with Thomas Ker 
of Hayhope, one of Henry Hall's nearest intimates, he was engaged in that 
encounter upon the account of the said Thomas Ker, who was killed there : ■ 
upon which account, he was forced to return to Scotland, and wandered up 
and down during the hottest time of the persecution, mostly with Mr. Rich- 
ard Cameron and Mr. Donald Cargil, during which time, besides his many 

H4 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

other christian virtues, he signalized himself for a real zeal in defence of the 
persecuted gospel preached in the fields, and gave several proofs of his 
valour and courage, particularly at Rutherglen, Drumclog, Glasgow, and 
Bothwell-bridge ; whereupon being forefaulted and violently pursued, to 
eschew the violent hands of his indefatigable persecutors, he was forced to 
go over to Holland ; where he had not stayed long, when his zeal for the 
persecuted interest of Christ, and his tender sympathy with the afflicted 
remnant of his covenanted brethren in Scotland, then wandering through 
the desolate caverns and dens of the earth, drew him home, choosing rather 
to undergo the utmost efforts of persecuting fury, than to live at ease when 
Joseph was in affliction, making Moses' generous choice, rather to suffer 
affliction with the people of God, that he might be a partaker of the fellow- 
ship of Christ's sufferings, than to enjoy that momentary pleasure the ease 
of the world could afford ; nor was he much concerned with the riches of 
the world, for he stood not to give his ground to hold the prohibited field- 
preachings upon, when none else would do it ; he was a lover and follower 
of the faithfully preached gospel, and was always against the indulgence ; he 
was with Mr. Richard Cameron at those meetings where he was censured. 

About a quarter of a year after his return from Holland, being in com- 
pany with the Rev. Mr. Donald Cargil, they were taken notice of by two 
blood-hounds the curates of Borrowstounness and Carridden, who went to 
Middleton, governor of Blackness-castle, and informed him of them ; who 
having consulted with these blood-thirsty ruffians, ordered his soldiers to 
follow him at a distance by two or three together, with convenient intervals 
for avoiding suspicion ; and he (the said Middleton) and his man riding up, 
observed where they alighted and stabled their horses ; and coming to them, 
pretended a great deal of kindness and civilities to Mr. Donald Cargil and 
him, desiring that they might have a glass of wine together. When they 
were set, and had taken each a glass, Middleton laid hands on them, and 
told them they were his prisoners, commanding in the king's name all the 
people of the house to assist, which they all refused, save a certain waiter, 
through whose means the governor got the gates shut till the soldiers came 
up ; and when the women of the town, rising to the rescue of the prisoners, 
had broke up the outer gate, Henry Hall, after some scuffle with the gov- 
ernor in the house, making his escape by the gate, received his mortal blow 
upon his head, with a carbine by Thomas George, waiter, and being conveyed 
out of the town by the assistance of the women, walked some pretty space 
of way upon his feet, but unable to speak much, save only that he made 
some short reflection upon a woman that interposed between him and the 
governor, hindered him to kill the governor, and so to make his escape 
timeously. So soon as he fainted, the women carried him to a house in the 
country, and notwithstanding the care of surgeons, he never recovered 
the power of speaking more. General Dalziel being advertised, came with 
a party of the guards, and carried him to Edinburgh ; he died by the way : 
his corpse they carried to the Cannon gate tolbooth, and kept him there 
three days without burial, though a number of friends convened for that 
effect, and thereafter they caused bury him clandestinely in the night. Such 
was the fury of these limbs of antichrist, that having killed the witnesses, 
they would not suffer their dead bodies to be decently put in graves. 

There was found upon him the rude draught of a paper containing a 
mutual engagement to stand to the necessary duty of the day against its 
stated enemies ; which was called by the persecutors, Mr. Cargil's convenant, 
and frequently in the foregoing testimonies, the Queensferry paper, because 

The Scottish Kirk 115 

there it was seized by the enemies. This paper Divine Providence seems to 
have made as it were the dying words and testimony of that worthy gentle- 
man ; and the enemies made it one of the captious and ensnaring questions 
they constantly put to the sufferers, and therefore it will not be impertinent 
here to insert the heads of it, as they are compendized by the learned author 
of The Hind Let Loose, page 133. For it was still owned by Mr. Donald 
Cargil, that the draught was not digested and polished, as it was intended, 
and therefore it will be so far from being a wrong to recite the heads of it 
only, that it is really a piece of justice done him, who never intended it 
should see the world as it was when the enemies found it. I shall not pretend 
to justify every expression in it, but rather submit it entirely to better judg- 
ments ; nor did the sufferers for most part adhere to it, without the limitation 
(so far as it was agreeable to the Word of God, and our national covenants) 
and in so far as it seems to import a purpose of assuming to themselves a 
magistratical authority, their practice declares all along, that they did not 
undertand it in that sense : 

The tenor of it was an engagement, 

1st, To avouch the only true and living God to be their God, and to close 
with his way of redemption by his son Jesus Christ, whose righteousness is 
only to be relied upon for justification ; and to take the Scriptures of the 
Old and New Testament to be the only object of faith, and rule of conversa- 
tion in all things. 2d, To establish in the land righteousness and religion, 
in the truth of its doctrine, purity and power of its worship, discipline and 
government, and to free the church of God of the corruption of Prelacy, on 
the one hand, and the thraldom of Erastianism on the other. 3d, To persevere 
in the doctrine of the reformed churches, especially that of Scotland, and in 
the worship prescribed in the Scriptures, without the inventions, adornings, 
and corruptions of men ; and in the Presbyterian government, exercised in 
sessions, presbyteries, synods and general assemblies, as a distinct govern- 
ment from the civil, and distinctly to be exercised, not after a carnal manner, 
by plurality of votes, or authority of a single person, but according to the 
Word of God, making and carrying the sentence. 4th, To endeavour the 
overthrow of the kingdom of darkness, and whatsoever is contrary to 
the kingdom of Christ, especially idolatry and popery in all its articles, and 
the overthrow of that power that hath established and upheld it — And to 
execute righteousness and judgment impartially, according to the Word of 
God, and degree of offences, upon the committers of these things especially, 
to-wit, blasphemy, idolatry, atheism, buggery, sorcery, perjury, uncleanness, 
profanation of the Lord's day, oppression and malignancy. 5th, Seriously 
considering, — there is no more speedy way of relaxation from the wrath of 
God, than hath ever lien upon the land since it engaged with these rulers, 
but of rejecting them, who hath so manifestly rejected God, — disclaiming his 
covenant — governing contrary to all right laws, divine and human — and con- 
trary to all the ends of government, by enacting and commanding impieties, 
injuries and robberies, to the denying of God his due, and the subjects theirs ; 
so that instead of government, godliness, and peace, there is nothing but 
rapine, tumult, and blood, which cannot be called a government, but a lust- 
ful rage — and they cannot be called governors, but public grassators and 
land judgments, which all ought to set themselves against, as they would do 
against pestilence, sword, and famine, raging amongst them — Seeing they 
have stopped the course of the law and justice against blasphemers, idol- 
aters, atheists, buggerers, murderers, incestuous and adulterous persons 
— and have made butcheries on the Lord's people, sold them as slaves, 

u6 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

imprisoned, forfeited, &c. and that upon no other account, but their main- 
taining Christ's right of ruling over their consciences, against the usurpations 
of men. Therefore, easily solving the objections : First, Of our ancestors 
obliging the nation to this race and line ; that they did not buy their liberty 
with our thraldom, nor could they bind their children to anything so much 
to their prejudice, and against natural liberty, (being a benefit next to life, 
if not in some regard above it) which is not an engagement to moral things : 
they could only bind to that government, which they esteemed the best for 
common good ; which reason ceasing, we are free to choose another, if we 
find it more conducible for that end. Second, Of the covenant binding to 
defend the king ; that that obligation is only in his maintenance of the true 
covenanted reformation, — which homage they cannot now require upon the 
account of the covenant which they have renounced and disclaimed ; and 
upon no other ground we are bound to them — the crown not being an in- 
heritance, that passeth from father to son, without the consent of tenants. 
Third, Of the hope of their returning from these courses, whereof there is 
none, seeing they have so often declared their purposes of persevering in 
them. And suppose they should dissemble a repentance, — supposing also they 
might be pardoned for that which is done — from whose guiltiness the land 
cannot be cleansed, but by executing God's righteous judgments upon them, 
— yet they cannot now be believed after they have violated all that human 
wisdom could devise to bind them. 

Upon these accounts they reject that king, and those associate with him 
in the government, — and declare them henceforth no lawful rulers, as they 
had declared them to be no lawful subjects, — they having destroyed the 
established religion, overturned the fundamental laws of the kingdom, taken 
away Christ's church-government, and changed the civil into tyranny, where 
none are associate in partaking of the government, but only those who will 
be found by justice guilty as criminals. — And declare they shall, God 
giving them power, set up government and governors according to the 
Word of God, and the qualifications required, Exodus xviii. 20 — And shall 
not commit the government to any single person or lineal succession, being 
not tyed as the Jews were to one single family, — and that kind being liable 
to most inconveniences, and aptest to degenerate tyranny. — And moreover, 
that these men set over them, shall be engaged to govern, principally by that 
civil and judicial law, (not that which is any way typical) given by God to 
his people Israel — as the best, so far as it goes, being given by God — espe- 
cially in matters of life and death, and other things so far as they reach, and 
are consistent with christian liberty — exempting divorces and polygamy, &c. 

6th, Seeing the greatest part of ministers not only were defective in preach- 
ing against the rulers for overthrowing religion — but hindered others also 
who were willing, and censured some that did it — and have voted for accep- 
tation of that liberty, founded upon, and given by virtue of that blasphe- 
mously arrogate and usurped power — and appeared before their courts to 
accept of it, and to be enacted and authorized their ministers — whereby 
they have become ministers of men, and bound to be answerable to them as 
they will. — And have preached for the lawfulness of paying that tribute, de- 
clared to be imposed for the bearing down of the true worship of God. — 
And advised poor prisoners to subscribe that bond, — which if it were uni- 
versally subscribed, — they should close that door, which the Lord hath made 
use of in all the churches of Europe, for casting off the yoke of the whore, 
— and stop all regress of men, when once brought under tyranny, to recover 
their liberty again. — They declare they neither can nor will hear them &c, 

The Scottish Kirk 117 

nor any who encouraged and strengthened their hands, and pleaded for 
them, and trafficked for union with them. 7th, That they are for a standing 
gospel ministry, rightly chosen, and rightly ordained, — and that none shall take 
upon them the preaching of the word, &c, unless called and ordained 

And whereas separation might be imputed to them, they repel both the 
malice, and the ignorance of that calumny. — For if there be a separation, it 
must be where the change is ; and that was not to be found in them, who 
were not separating from the communion of the true church ; nor setting up 
a new ministry, but cleaving to the same ministers and ordinances that 
formerly they followed, when others have fled to new ways, and a new 
authority, which is like the old piece in the new garment. 8th, That they 
shall defend themselves in their civil, natural and divine rights and liberties. 
— And if any assault them, they shall look on it as a declaring a war, and 
take all advantages that one enemy does of another — But trouble and injure 
none, but those that injure them. 


1 During the first fifty years of this time, the Scottish Kirk was practically supreme. 
What it then did to "retard human progress," as Mr. Buckle would say, is best summed 
up in the words of its enemy. King James VI., spoken when he first went down into 
England, and presided at the Hampton Court Conference, held in January, 1604. See pp. 


2 History of Civilization in England, vol. ii., ch. ii.-v. 

3 What may be termed, in its broadest sense, the utilitarian tendency of modern re- 
ligious thought, may be noted in some of the popular writings of Alfred Russell Wallace, S. 
Laing, A. J. Balfour, Benjamin Kidd, Matthew Arnold, John Fiske, etc. 

4 Vol. ii., ch. ii. (vol. ii., pp. 152, 153, American edition). 

8 See also Gardiner's History of England, 1603-1642, vol. i., pp. 22-26; vol. viii., 

PP. 373-375. 

6 History of England, book vi., ch. ii. 

7 History of England, vol. vi., ch. xxxvii., pp. 220, 221. 

8 The Scotch have been greatly, and, to a certain extent, justly blamed, because, instead 
of being satisfied with securing the liberty of their own church, they insisted on the over- 
throw of that of England. It should be remembered, however, that intolerance was the 
epidemic of the age. The Episcopalians enforced the prayer-book, the Presbyterians the 
covenant, the Independents the engagement. The last being more of a political character 
than either of the others, was, so far, the least objectionable. It was, however, both in de- 
sign and in fact, what Neal calls it, "a severe test for the Presbyterians." Besides, the rigid 
doctrine of the exclusive divine right of Presbyterianism, and an intolerant opposition to 
Prelacy, did not prevail among the Scotch until they were driven, by persecution, into ex- 
treme opinions. When they found Episcopacy, in their own bitter experience, associated 
with despotism and superstition, and, in their firm belief, with irreligion and Popery, it is 
not wonderful that they regarded it as a bitter root which could bear nothing good. Their 
best apology is that which they themselves urged at the time. They considered it essential 
to the liberty of their church and country that the power of the bishops should be destroyed 
in England. The persecutions which they had already endured, and their just apprehensions 
of still greater evils, sprang from the principles and conduct of the English prelates. How 
well founded this opinion was, the atrocities consequent on the restoration of Charles II. 
and the re-establishment of Episcopacy, abundantly proved. — Hodge, History of the 
Presbyterian Church, vol. i., pp. 46, 47. 

•See Lecky, England in the Eighteenth Century, vol. ii., ch. v. 

n8 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

10 The Assembly which met in the beginning of 1696 passed an act against the atheistical 
opinions of the Deists, which received a melancholy comment in an occurrence which took 
place during the same year. A student of eighteen, named Thomas Aikenhead, had un- 
fortunately imbibed sceptical opinions, and had been imprudent enough to spout them to 
some of his companions. Trinity in unity, he said, was a contradiction. Moses had learned 
magic in Egypt, and this was the secret of his miracles. Ezra was the author of the Penta- 
teuch ; Theanthropas was as great an absurdity as Hirco-Cervus. These sceptical common- 
places reached the ears of the authorities, and the youth was indicted under an old statute 
which made it a capital crime to curse the Supreme Being. He was convicted and sentenced 
to be hanged. It was in vain that the poor lad with death before his eyes, recanted his 
errors and begged for his life. Even a reprieve for a few days was denied him, and the 
clergy of the city . . . gave their voice for his death. He died with a Bible in his hand 
in token of his change of mind. — Cunningham, Church History of Scotland, vol. ii., pp. 
197, 198. 

11 Hodge, History of the Presbyterian Church in America, pp. 47-50. 

12 The enormities of this detestable government are far too numerous, even in species, 
to be enumerated in this slight sketch ; and of course, most instances of cruelty have not 
been recorded. The privy council was accustomed to extort confessions by torture — that 
grim divan of bishops, lawyers, and peers, sucking the groans of each undaunted enthusiast, 
in hopes that some imperfect avowal might lead to the sacrifice of other victims, or at least 
warrant the execution of the present. ... It was very possible that Episcopacy might 
be of apostolical institution ; but for this institution houses had been burned and fields laid 
waste, and the gospel been preached in the wilderness, and its ministers had been shot in 
their prayers, and husbands had been murdered before their wives, and virgins had been de- 
filed, and many had died by the executioner, and by massacre, and imprisonment, and in 
exile and slavery, and women had been tied to stakes on the sea-shore till the tide rose to 
overflow them, and some had been tortured and mutilated ; it was a religion of the boots 
and the thumbscrew, which a good man must be very cool-blooded indeed if he did not hate 
and reject from the hands which offered it. For, after all, it is much more certain that the 
Supreme Being abhors cruelty and persecution, than that he has set up bishops to have a 
superiority over Presbyters. — Hallam, Constitutional History, vol. iii., pp. 435, 442. The 
wonderful subserviency and degradation of the Scottish parliament during this period must 
strike all readers with astonishment. This fact is partially explained, and the disgrace in 
some measure palliated by the peculiarity of its constitution. The controlling power was 
virtually in the hands of the bishops, who were the creatures, and of course, the servants of 
the crown. The lords of the articles were originally a committee chosen by the parliament 
for the preparation of business. But Charles I, without any authority from parliament, had 
the matter so arranged, that "the bishops chose eight peers, the peers eight bishops ; and 
these appointed sixteen commissioners of shires and boroughs. Thus the whole power was 
devolved upon the bishops, the slaves and sycophants of the crown. The parliament itself 
met only on two days, the first and last of their pretended session, the one time to choose 
the lords of the articles, the other to ratify what they proposed." — Hallam, vol. iii. f p. 428. 
This arrangement was renewed after the restoration of Charles II. 

13 " So soon as it was known in Scotland that William of Orange had landed at Torbay ; 
that he was slowly advancing toward London ; that the English nobility were flocking to him ; 
that the royal army was deserting to him, that the bewildered James had attempted to flee 
the country, the people began to show how ready they were to concur with the prince in 
shaking off the burdens under which they had groaned. 

" Meanwhile there were wild rumors afloat of an army of Irish Papists that had landed, 
or was about to land, on the coast of Galloway. Some said it was already at Kirkcudbright 
and had burned it. . . . In such times rumors are rife. People began to dread a 
massacre. The Council had dissolved. The military had been marched into England. 

The Scottish Kirk 119 

There was a dissolution of all authority. The peasantry of the western counties began to 
collect in large crowds, armed with such weapons as they could procure, and to take the law 
into their own hands. Their wrath vented itself on the unhappy curates. They resolved to 
purge the temple of them without waiting for the decision of the legislature. They began 
their work upon Christmas, which seems to have been thought an appropriate day. In some 
cases the curates saved themselves from insult by timely flight. In other cases they were 
laid hold of by the rabble, carried about in mock procession, had their gowns torn over their 
heads, their Prayer-Books burned before their eyes, and then were told to be off, and never 
to show themselves in the parish again. When done with the minister, the mob frequently 
entered the manse, tumbled the furniture out at the windows, marched the inmates to the 
door, took possession of the keys ; and on next Sunday a preacher who had till lately been 
skulking among the hills, was found in the pulpit thundering against persecuting prelatists. 
These rabblings went on for two or three months ; every now and then an instance was 
occurring till almost every parish in the south and west was cleaned of its Episcopal in- 
cumbent. Upwards of two hundred clergymen were thus rabbled out of their manses, their 
parishes, and their livings (Somers's Tracts, coll. iii., vol. iv., p. 133. "Case of the Epis- 
copal Clergy in Scotland Truly Represented." " Case of the Afflicted Clergy," etc., Burnet's 
History, vol. ii., p. 444). 

" The wives and families of these men shared in their misfortunes. Many must have been 
rendered homeless ; some reduced to absolute beggary. . . . Still no life was lost. The 
only martyrdom these men underwent was a little rough usage from an ignorant rabble, and 
the loss of their livings. And it must be remembered that in the districts of the country 
where these things happened the curates occupied their pulpits in opposition to the will of 
the people, and enjoyed stipends of which others had been tyrannically deprived. They had 
no root in the soil ; they were aliens in their own parishes. What is more, they were sus- 
pected of having abetted the persecution of those who preferred their old Presbyterian 
ministers to them. They had their roll of absentees from church to hand to the military 
officers commanding in the district. . . 

4 ' For twenty-five long years, the Presbyterians had been cruelly oppressed ; and yet when: 
times of revolution came, they did not rise and murder their oppressors. Even the rabblings 
were conducted chiefly by the Cameronians and the lowest of the people, and many of the 
Presbyterians strongly condemned them. " — Cunningham, Church History of Scotland, vol. ii., 
pp. 1 51-153. 

M See Appendix R (The Scottish Martyrs.) 


THE real differences between the religious life of Scotland and that of 
England are not wholly those of creed and polity, brought about by 
the Reformation of the sixteenth century. They would seem to go back 
much farther than that period, and to have given evidence of existence 
more than nine hundred years before. They may have originated from the 
radical differences between the ancient pagan mythology of the Druids and 
that of the Teutons. The religious genius of early Scotland was, of course, 
largely Celtic, and there is no reason for believing that the more or less 
complete but very gradual amalgamation of the early race with that of the 
Norse and the Angle has essentially altered the inherent racial tendency to- 
ward emotional fervor and intensity. Going from a warmer climate into 
the comparatively bleak and northern country of Caledonia, the early Celt 
doubtless became more " hard-headed," and lost much of that exuberance 
of emotion which to-day is so characteristic of his cousins in France and 
Ireland, and, perhaps, also in Wales. His peculiar traits were modified later 
by the commingling of his blood with that of the Northmen. But his early 
racial point of view was far distant from that of the pagans who brought the 
worship of Woden into Britain, and the assimilating influences of climate 
and intermarriage, even to this day, have not sufficed to break down the bar- 
rier between the two cults. Christianity was probably planted in Great 
Britain long before the Romans left. The first native account we have of 
its early history there is that of Bede, in his allusions to the conversion 
(176-190) of Lucius, King of the Britons, and to the establishment by Ninian 
of the Church of Candida Casa at Whithorn, in Galloway. This foundation 
is supposed to have been made about the year 397, and Ninian (who died 
about 432) was therefore the precursor and contemporary of St. Patrick (396- 
469 ?). More than a hundred and sixty years later, Columba, the Scot, came 
from the island of Iona to North Britain, and converted the Picts, as Bede 
tells us in the following passage (Ecd. Hist., bk. iii., ch. iv.) : 

In the year of our Lord 565, when Justin, the younger, the successor of 
Justinian, had the government of the Roman Empire, there came into Brit- 
ain a famous priest and abbat, a monk by habit and life, whose name was 
Columba, to preach the word of God to the provinces of the northern Picts, 
who are separated from the southern parts by steep and rugged mountains ; 
for the southern Picts, who dwell on this side of those mountains, had long 
before, as is reported, forsaken the errors of idolatry, and embraced the 
truth, by the preaching of Ninias, a most reverend bishop and holy man of 
the British nation, who had been regularly instructed at Rome, in the faith 
and mysteries of the truth ; whose episcopal see, named after St. Martin the 


Religion 121 

bishop, and famous for a stately church, (wherein he and many other saints 
rest in the body,) is still in existence among the English nation. The place 
belongs to the province of the Bernicians, and is generally called the White 
House, because he there built a church of stone, which was not usual among 
the Britons. 

Columba came into Britain in the ninth year of the reign of Bridius, who 
was the son of Meilochon, and the powerful king of the Pictish nation, and 
he converted that nation to the faith of Christ, by his preaching and exam- 
ple, whereupon he also received of them the aforesaid island for a monas- 
tery, for it is not very large, but contains about five families, according to 
the English computation. His successors hold the island to this day ; he 
was also buried therein, having died at the age of seventy-seven, about 
thirty-two years after he came into Britain to preach. Before he passed 
over into Britain, he had built a noble monastery in Ireland, which, from 
the great number of oaks, is in the Scottish tongue called Dearm-ach — The 
Field of Oaks [now Derry]. From both which monasteries, many others had 
their beginning through his disciples, both in Britain and Ireland ; but the 
monastery in the island where his body lies, is the principal of them all. 

Columba's religion was the same as that of St. Patrick. It had been 
brought from the East at a time when the early Church retained its primitive 
simplicity, and before it had become corrupted through the acquisition of 
that temporal power which came to it upon the dissolution of the Roman 
Empire. 1 

The English were converted by St. Augustine, who came from Rome to 
Britain in 597." He was followed in 625 by Paulinus. The success of 
their missions is related by Bede in his Ecclesiastical History, bk. i., ch. 
xxv., and bk. ii., ch. ix. 

The first conflict between the primitive Christianity of the Celts and the 
more secularized ecclesiasticism of Rome occurred in England about the 
year 604, and in all its aspects is typical of the struggle which took place in 
North Britain between the latter-day representatives of the two systems in 
the time of the Stuarts. Bede's narrative, 3 therefore, needs no commentary : 

In the meantime, Augustine, with the assistance of King Ethelbert, drew 
together to a conference the bishops, or doctors, of the next province of the 
Britons, at a place which is to this day called Augustine's Ac, that is, Au- 
gustine's Oak, on the borders of the Wiccii and West Saxons ; and began 
by brotherly admonitions to persuade them, that preserving Catholic unity 
with him, they should undertake the common labour of preaching the Gos- 
pel to the Gentiles. For they did not keep Easter Sunday at the proper 
time, but from the fourteenth to the twentieth moon ; which computation is 
contained in a revolution of eighty-four years. Besides, they did several 
other things which were against the unity of the church. 4 When, after a 
long disputation, they did not comply with the entreaties, exhortations, or 
rebukes of Augustine and his companions, but preferred their own traditions 
before all the churches in the world, which in Christ agree among them- 
selves, the holy father, Augustine, put an end to this troublesome and tedious 
contention, saying, " Let us beg of God, who causes those who are of one 
mind to live in his Father's house, that he will vouchsafe, by his heavenly to- 
kens, to declare to us, which tradition is to be followed ; and by what means 

122 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

we are to find our way to his heavenly kingdom. Let some infirm person be 
brought, and let the faith and practice of those, by whose prayers he shall 
be healed, be looked upon as acceptable to God, and be adopted by all." 
The adverse party unwillingly consenting, a blind man of the English race 
was brought, who having been presented to the priests of the Britons, found 
no benefit or cure from their ministry ; at length, Augustine, compelled by 
real necessity, bowed his knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, pray- 
ing that the lost sight might be restored to the blind man, and by the corpo- 
real enlightening of one man, the light of spiritual grace might be kindled 
in the hearts of many of the faithful. Immediately the blind man received 
sight, and Augustine was by all declared the preacher of the Divine truth. 
The Britons then confessed, that it was the true way of righteousness which 
Augustine taught ; but that they could not depart from their ancient customs 
without the consent and leave of their people. They therefore desired that 
a second synod might be appointed, at which more of their number would 
be present. 

This being decreed, there came (as is asserted) seven bishops of Britons, 
and many most learned men, particularly from their most noble monastery, 
which, in the English tongue, is called Bancornburg [Bangor], over which 
the Abbat Dunooth is said to have presided at that time. They that were 
to go to the aforesaid council, repaired first to a certain holy and discreet 
man, who was wont to lead an eremitical life among them, advising with 
him, whether they ought, at the preaching of Augustine, to forsake their tra- 
ditions. He answered, " If he is a man of God, follow him." — " How shall 
we know that ? " said they. He replied, " Our Lord saith, * Take my yoke 
upon you, and learn of me, for I am meek and lowly in heart ' ; if there- 
fore, Augustine is meek and lowly of heart, it is to be believed that he has 
taken upon him the yoke of Christ, and offers the same to you to take 
upon you. But, if he is stern and haughty, it appears that he is not of 
God, nor are we to regard his words." They insisted again, " And how 
shall we discern even this ? " — " Do you contrive," said the anchorite, " that 
he may first arrive with his company at the place where the synod is to be 
held ; and if at your approach he shall rise up to you, hear him submissively, 
being assured that he is the servant of Christ ; but if he shall despise you, 
and not rise up to you, whereas you are more in number, let him also be de- 
spised by you." 

They did as he directed ; and it happened, that when they came, Augus- 
tine was sitting on a chair, which they observing, were in a passion, and 
charging him with pride, endeavoured to contradict all he said. He said to 
them, " You act in many particulars contrary to our custom, or rather the 
custom of the universal church, and yet, if you will comply with me in 
these three points, viz., to keep Easter at the due time ; to administer bap- 
tism, by which we are again born to God, according to the custom of the 
holy Roman Apostolic Church ; and jointly with us to preach the word of 
God to the English nation, we will readily tolerate all the other things you 
do, though contrary to our customs." They answered they would do none 
of those things, nor receive him as their archbishop; for they alleged among 
themselves, that " if he would not now rise up to us, how much more will he 
contemn us, as of no worth, if we shall begin to be under his subjection ? " To 
whom the man of God, Augustine, is said, in a threatening manner, to have 
foretold, that in case they would not join in unity with their brethren, they 
should be warred upon by their enemies ; and, if they would not preach 
the way of life to the English nation, they should at their hands undergo the 

Religion 123 

vengeance of death. All which, through the dispensation of the Divine 
judgment, fell out exactly as he had predicted. 

For afterwards the warlike king of the English, Ethelfrid, of whom we 
have already spoken, having raised a mighty army, made a very great 
slaughter of that perfidious nation, at the City of Legions, which by the 
English is called Legacestir, but by the Britons more rightly Carlegion 
[Chester]. Being about to give battle, he observed their priests, who were 
come together to offer up their prayers to God for the soldiers, standing 
apart in a place of more safety ; he inquired who they were ? or what they 
came together to do in that place ? Most of them were of the monastery of 
Bangor in which, it is reported, there was so great a number of monks, that 
the monastery being divided into seven parts, with a ruler over each, none 
of those parts contained less than three hundred men, who all lived by the 
labour of their hands. Many of these, having observed a fast of three days, 
resorted among others to pray at the aforesaid battle, having one Brocmail 
appointed for their protector, to defend them whilst they were intent upon 
their prayers, against the swords of the barbarians. King Ethelfrid being 
informed of the occasion of their coming, said, " If then they cry to their 
God against us, in truth, though they do not bear arms, yet they fight 
against us, because they oppose us by their prayers." He, therefore, com- 
manded them to be attacked first, and then destroyed the rest of the impious 
army, not without considerable loss of his own forces. About twelve hun- 
dred of those that came to pray are said to have been killed, and only fifty 
to have escaped by flight. Brocmail turning his back with his men, at the 
first approach of the enemy, left those whom he ought to have defended, un- 
armed and exposed to the swords of the enemies. Thus was fulfilled the 
prediction of the holy Bishop Augustine, though he himself had been long 
before taken up into the heavenly kingdom ; that those perfidious men 
should feel the vengeance of temporal death also, because they had despised 
the offer of eternal salvation. 

In Northumbria, also, some of the Scottish missionaries, later, had 
labored and made converts. When King Oswy was asked to join the com- 
munion of Rome, the Scots sought to have him continue in their own as being 
that of the more ancient British Church. He accordingly appointed a 
synod to be held at Whitby in the year 664, and there, like James I. at the 
Hampton Court Conference 940 years later, the king was won over by the 
" superior arguments " of the bishops and decided to accept their innova- 
tions, and to give up the less formal and more primitive church system of 
the Scots. For the account of this conference let us again have recourse 
to Bede 6 : 

In the meantime, Bishop Aidan being dead, Finan, who was ordained and 
sent by the Scots, succeeded him in the bishopric, and built a church in the 
Isle of Lindisfarne, the episcopal see; nevertheless, after the manner of the 
Scots, he made it, not of stone, but of hewn oak, and covered it with reeds; 
and the same was afterwards dedicated in honour of St. Peter the Apostle, by 
the reverend Archbishop Theodore. Eadbert, also bishop of that place, 
took off the thatch, and covered it, both roof and walls, with plates of lead. 

At this time, a great and frequent controversy happened about the ob- 
servance of Easter, those that came from Kent or France affirming, that the 

124 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

Scots kept Easter Sunday contrary to the custom of the universal church. 
Among them was a most zealous defender of the true Easter, whose name 
was Ronan, a Scot by nation, but instructed in ecclesiastical truth, either 
in France or Italy, who, disputing with Finan, convinced many, or at least 
induced them to make a more strict inquiry after the truth; yet he could 
not prevail upon Finan, but, on the contrary, made him the more inveterate 
by reproof, and a professed opposer of the truth, being of a hot and violent 
temper. James, formerly the deacon of the venerable Archbishop Paulinus, 
as has been said above, kept the true and Catholic Easter, with all those 
that he could persuade to adopt the right way. Queen Eanfleda and her 
followers also observed the same as she had seen practised in Kent, having 
with her a Kentish priest that followed the Catholic mode, whose name was 
Romanus. Thus it is said to have happened in those times that Easter was 
twice kept in one year; and that when the king having ended the time of 
fasting, kept his Easter, the queen and her followers were still fasting and 
celebrating Palm Sunday. This difference about the observance of Easter, 
whilst Aidan lived, was patiently tolerated by all men, as being sensible, 
that though he could not keep Easter contrary to the custom of those who 
had sent him, yet he industriously laboured to practise all works of faith, 
piety, and love, according to the custom of all holy men; for which reason 
he was deservedly beloved by all, even by those who differed in opinion 
concerning Easter, and was held in veneration, not only by indifferent per- 
sons, but even by the bishops, Honorius of Canterbury, and Felix of the 
East Angles. 

But after the death of Finan, who succeeded him, when Colman, who 
was also sent out of Scotland, came to be bishop, a greater controversy arose 
about the observance of Easter, and the rules of ecclesiastical life. Where- 
upon this dispute began naturally to influence the thoughts and hearts of 
many, who feared, lest having received the name of Christians, they might 
happen to run, or to have run, in vain. This reached the ears of King 
Oswy and his son Alfrid; for Oswy, having been instructed and baptized 
by the Scots, and being very perfectly skilled in their language, thought 
nothing better than what they taught. But Alfrid, having been instructed 
in Christianity by Wilfrid, a most learned man, who had first gone to 
Rome to learn the ecclesiastical doctrine, and spent much time at Lyons 
with Dalfin, archbishop of France, from whom also he had received the 
ecclesiastical tonsure, rightly thought this man's doctrine ought to be pre- 
ferred before all the traditions of the Scots. For this reason he had also 
given him a monastery of forty families, at a place called Rhypum; which 
place, not long before, he had given to those that followed the system of 
the Scots for a monastery; but forasmuch as they afterwards, being left to 
their choice, prepared to quit the place rather than alter their opinion, he gave 
the place to him, whose life and doctrine were worthy of it. 

Agilbert, bishop of the West Saxons, above-mentioned, a friend to King 
Alfrid and to Abbat Wilfrid, had at that time come into the province of the 
Northumbrians, and was making some stay among them; at the request of 
Alfrid, made Wilfrid a priest in his monastery. He had in his company a 
priest, whose name was Agatho. The controversy being there started, con- 
cerning Easter, or the tonsure, or other ecclesiastical affairs, it was agreed, 
that a synod should be held in the monastery of Streanehalch, which signi- 
fies the Bay of the Lighthouse, where the Abbess Hilda, a woman devoted 
to God, then presided; and that there this controversy should be decided. 
The kings, both father and son, came thither, Bishop Colman with his 

Religion 125 

Scottish clerks, and Agilbert with the priests Agatho and Wilfrid ; James 
and Romanus were on their side; but the Abbess Hilda and her followers 
were for the Scots, as was also the venerable Bishop Cedd, long before 
ordained by the Scots, as has been said above, and he was in that council a 
most careful interpreter for both parties. 

King Oswy first observed, that it behoved those who served one God 
to observe the same rule of life; and as they all expected the same kingdom 
in heaven, so they ought not to differ in the celebration of the Divine mys- 
teries; but rather to inquire which was the truest tradition, that the same 
might be followed by all; he then commanded his bishop, Colman, first to 
declare what the custom was which he observed, and whence it derived its- 
origin. Then Colman said: "The Easter which I keep, I received from 
my elders, who sent me bishop hither; all our forefathers, men beloved of 
God, are known to have kept it after the same manner; and that the same 
may not seem to any contemptible or worthy to be rejected, it is the same 
which St. John the Evangelist, the disciple beloved of our Lord, with all 
the churches over which he presided, is recorded to have observed." Hav- 
ing said thus much, and more to the like effect, the king commanded Agil- 
bert to show whence his custom of keeping Easter was derived, or on what 
authority it was grounded. Agilbert answered : " I desire that my disciple, 
the priest Wilfrid, may speak in my stead ; because we both concur with 
the other followers of the ecclesiastical tradition that are here present, and 
he can better explain our opinion in the English language, than I can by an 

Then Wilfrid, being ordered by the king to speak, delivered himself 
thus: — " The Easter which we observe, we saw celebrated by all at Rome, 
where the blessed apostles, Peter and Paul, lived, taught, suffered, and 
were buried; we saw the same done in Italy and in France, when we trav- 
elled through those countries for pilgrimage and prayer. We found the 
same practised in Africa, Asia, Egypt, Greece, and all the world, wherever 
the church of Christ is spread abroad through several nations and tongues, 
at one and the same time; except only these and their accomplices in obsti- 
nacy, I mean the Picts and the Britons, who foolishly, in these two remote 
islands of the world, and only in part even of them, oppose all the rest of 
the universe. 

" But as for you, Colman, and your companions, you certainly sin, if, hav- 
ing heard the decrees of the Apostolic See, and of the universal church, and 
that the same is confirmed by holy writ, you refuse to follow them ; for, though 
your fathers were holy, do you think that their small number, in a corner of 
the remotest island, is to be preferred before the universal church of Christ 
throughout the world ? And if that Columba of yours, (and, I may say, ours 
also, if he was Christ's servant,) was a holy man and powerful in miracles, 
yet could he be preferred before the most blessed prince of the apostles, to 
whom our Lord said, ' Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my 
church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it, and to thee I will 
give the keys of the kingdom of heaven ' ? " 

When Wilfrid had spoken thus, the king said, " Is it true, Colman, that 
these words were spoken to Peter by our Lord ? " He answered, " It is true, 
O king! " Then says he, " Can you show any such power given to your 
Columba?" Colman answered, "None." Then added the king, "Do 
you both agree that these words were principally directed to Peter, and that 
the keys of heaven were given to him by our Lord ? " They both answered, 
" We do." Then the king concluded, " And I also say unto you, that he 

126 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

is the door-keeper, whom I will not contradict, but will, as far as I know 
and am able, in all things obey his decrees, lest, when I come to the gates 
of the kingdom of heaven, there should be none to open them, he being my 
adversary who is proved to have the keys." The king having said this, all 
present, both great and small, gave their assent, and renouncing the more 
imperfect institution, resolved to conform to that which they found to be 

The disputation being ended, and the company broken up, Agilbert 
returned home. Colman, perceiving that his doctrine was rejected, and his 
sect despised, took with him such as would not comply with the Catholic 
-Easter and the tonsure, (for there was much controversy about that also,) 
and went back into Scotland, to consult with his people what was to be done 
in this case. Cedd, forsaking the practices of the Scots, returned to his 
bishopric, having submitted to the Catholic observance of Easter. This 
disputation happened in the year of our Lord's incarnation 664, which was 
the twenty-second year of the reign of King Oswy, and the thirtieth of the 
episcopacy of the Scots among the English; for Aidan was bishop seventeen 
years, Finan ten, and Colman three. 

The matter of religion came up again in North Britain in 717, when 
Nechtan, King of the Picts, yielding to the southern influence then becom- 
ing powerful at his court, accepted the tonsure, and replaced the Scottish 
clergy with that of Rome (Bede, bk. v., ch. xxi.): 

At that time, [716] Naitan, king of the Picts. inhabiting the northern 
parts of Britain, taught by frequent meditation on the ecclesiastical writings, 
renounced the error which he and his nation had till then been under, in 
relation to the observance of Easter, and submitted, together with his peo- 
ple, to celebrate the Catholic time of our Lord's resurrection. For per- 
forming this with the more ease and greater authority, he sought assistance 
from the English, whom he knew to have long since formed their religion 
after the example of the holy Roman Apostolic Church. Accordingly he 
-sent messengers to the venerable Ceolfrid, abbat of the monastery of the 
blessed apostles, Peter and Paul, which stands at the mouth of the river 
Wear, and near the river Tyne, at the place called J arrow, which he glori- 
ously governed after Benedict, of whom we have before spoken; desiring 
that he would write him a letter containing arguments, by the help of which 
he might the better confute those that presumed to keep Easter out of the due 
time; as also concerning the form and manner of tonsure for distinguishing 
the clergy; not to mention that he himself possessed much information in 
these particulars. He also prayed to have architects sent him to build a 
church in his nation after the Roman manner, promising to dedicate the 
same in honour of St. Peter, the prince of the apostles, and that he and all 
his people would always follow the custom of the holy Roman Apostolic 
Church, as far as their remoteness from the Roman language and nation 
would allow. The reverend Abbat Ceolfrid, complying with his desires and 
request, sent the architects he desired. 

This action of Nechtan, as we shall see in a later chapter, had a great deal 
to do in bringing about the ultimate overthrow of the Pictish dynasty by 
Kenneth Mc Alpine, and the re-installation of the Scottish forms of worship. 8 
The Roman Church was set up in Scotland again after 1068, through the 

Religion 127 

influence of Queen Margaret 7 and during the feudal period of Britain it 
remained in the ascendancy, although for some time before its final over- 
throw the clergy seem to have lost their influence with the masses. 8 

Surely it is more reasonable to account for the greater influence of the 
early Scottish clergy over the people by ascribing it to their less autocratic 
manners and simpler lives, rather than to " Scottish superstition." 

In examining into the differences between the Scottish and English 
views of things religious, we shall find also that they have ever been influ- 
enced and controlled by the diverse forces originating from differences of 
race, climate, and physical environment. Stated broadly, the two contrary 
social systems in which they are embodied may be said to symbolize the 
operation of two important but opposing influences of nature, both con- 
stantly working for the development and betterment of the race of man. 
These influences may be denominated, for lack of better terms, knowledge 
and environment; the first, perhaps, closely related to or even generated 
by the second, yet, nevertheless, ceaselessly exercising itself against it, and 
seeking to secure its subordination and control. The second, as constantly 
pursuing its blind course, and except in so far as it is guided and restrained 
by the first, wholly impassive as to whether its casualties elevate or ruin. 
One comprehends all the outward material forces of nature; the other, the 
inherent consciousness of organic existence. One wields the fate-hammer 
of life, under whose blows individual character is either shaped into a noble 
and beautiful form, or beaten into a base and ignoble counterfeit. The 
other serves both as a die and a buffer, by which the crushing power of the 
hammer is at the same time moderated and rightly directed. These two 
influences constitute the mainsprings of action in mankind, and working to- 
gether they have raised man so far above the level of the first created being as 
to lead us to infer that their ultimate accomplishment may some day realize 
all the latent aspirations of the human soul. The social organism of England, 
with reference to the individual, is not unlike the phenomena of natural en- 
vironment with relation to its effects on organic life. The operation of the 
forces of both proceeds with little regard to the value of the unit. Neither 
takes account of the individual as such, but only through his relation to the 
whole, and then under certain fixed and immutable laws governing his status 
with respect to his surroundings, any infraction of which involves immediate 
punishment. In both cases the controlling force is from without. In Scot- 
land, on the other hand, the individual is everything. The unit instinctively 
seeks to stand alone, and to stand up as a unit wherever it may be placed. 
Verily, each man is a law unto himself; although, in most cases, he exer- 
cises sufficient self-control to make him mindful of the rights of his neigh : 
bor. In that way, the Scot practically rises above the restrictions of set 
forms of law, or stipulated rules of conduct. In his case there is little 
necessity for these restrictions. In express terms, he governs himself and is 
no longer the slave to his political or social environment, but independent of 

128 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

it, if not its master. Conscience has become the touchstone to character, 
and the controlling force is from within. 

In a broader sense, these distinctions apply to the whole scheme of man's 
development. In the evolution of human society the joint work of this in- 
ward and outward force may well be traced in the phenomena of war and 

War is the natural environment of society, ever threatening its destruc- 
tion : industrial activity, or labor, is the inherent safeguard of society, and its 
heritage from the slave. The transition of the European proletariat from a 
state of savagery to one of civilized industry began with the subjection of con- 
quered peoples by Grecian and Roman warriors ; and had it not been for the 
universal spread of slavery which took place under the Roman Empire, the 
civilization of the Caucasian to-day might differ but little from that of his 
darker-skinned brothers the world over. It was through slavery that natural 
man, constrained, first learned to toil, and so began to work out the salvation 
of his race. The twin supporting pillars of ancient society were predatory 
warfare and the enslavement, or robbery, of labor. On these the fabric of 
Roman power and civilization mainly rested. Taken together, they likewise 
formed the chief corner-stone of the institution of feudalism. Naturally, there- 
fore, they became, in part, the inheritance of Rome's chief legatee and feudal- 
ism's great ally, master, and successor — the Church of the Middle Ages. 9 In 
the childhood of the world, man's instinct, begotten of experience, became 
sufficiently developed to enable him to guard against the ordinary destructive 
forces of nature. But instinct alone was powerless to save his race from the 
terrible agency invoked when some, desiring to reap where they had not sown, 
made war on their fellow-men. It then became necessary for men to battle, 
and the victory always went to the stronger. The killing of the vanquished, 
which in the early days of the race would appear to have been common 
both in plundering and in bullying warfare, would largely tend to prevent 
population from increasing beyond a point where the natural products of the 
earth and the prey of the hunter were sufficient to sustain it. In the occa- 
sional sparing of female lives and the carrying off and subsequent debase- 
ment of an enemy's women-folk doubtless is to be found the origin of 
human slavery. After that, men's lives came at times to be spared, and 
domestic slavery was instituted. 10 From this it was but a few steps to in- 
dustrial slavery, and then began the operation of those influences which 
have since produced our modern civilization. As men were conquered and 
enslaved the necessity for war grew less imperative; and as men began to 
labor and to reap, the value of a man's life became greater and life's prob- 
lems took on a new meaning. Hundreds of years after the building of the 
pyramids man was still learning the lesson of patience and endurance, of 
labor and of hope, of right and of wrong, under the lash of the taskmaster, 
at the oar of the galley, or in the ranks of his lord's army. In time, warriors 
came to see the superior advantages of peace, and indiscriminate warfare 

Religion 129 

ceased. Conscience was born and free labor inaugurated. As the moral 
sense developed, the lot of the slave became less hard. Laws were made to 
mitigate the suffering of the oppressed. Gradually the form of slavery was 
modified, and ultimately it was changed to serfdom, vassalage, and tenantry. 
Finally its most objectionable features were done away with, and to-day they 
practically cease to exist. 

But the force of despotic authority which established slavery as an in- 
stitution still remains, and its burdens have not yet been completely removed 
from the shoulders of mankind. In feudal Europe the fitting complement, 
guide, and accessory to this force was the power of the mediaeval Church, 
serving as a check, it is true, upon certain excesses of tyranny, yet without 
which it would have been impossible for absolutism to have restrained so 
long the rising power of conscience. In England — is it unfair to say it ? — the 
Church Establishment during the past three hundred and sixty years has 
stood in a like relation to kingly authority, and is to-day the emblem and 
memorial of a once all-powerful but now impotent and fast-disappearing 
institution of monarchy, just as the Roman Church system is a surviving relic 
of the drawn sword and the mailed hand of the age of iron. Both alike be- 
long to despotism, feudalism, and those other early stages of development 
which European civilization has passed through and left behind. 

On the other hand, can it be truthfully denied that the theological system 
which, in matters religious, takes as its chief tenet the theory of the suprem- 
acy of the individual conscience over the voice of earthly authority — that 
makes man's accountability to a God a more imperative obligation than his 
accountability to a prince, and controverts the divine right of kings — can it 
be denied that this system on which the polity of England has ever sought 
to cast odium by the use in pulpit and statute of such invidious terms as 
"dissent," "nonconformity," "toleration," "heresy, " merely embodies 
the accumulated protest of man's conscience against the oppressions of 
tyranny ; and that it constituted the first and only effective barrier that has 
ever been erected to save the race from the encroachments of that force 
most antagonistic to human welfare — man's unrestricted exercise of arbi- 
trary power ? 

Verily, the chief distinction between the Scottish and English character 
is that arising from the two different conceptions of religion. The Scotch 
make of religion their main guiding standard of life and rule of conduct. 
Its requirements are supreme over those of any temporal or political con- 
sideration. Its functions and obligations are superior to those of any secular 
authority, often, indeed, more sacredly regarded than the bond which holds 
together the social fabric. Among the English, on the contrary, religion 
has ever been of secondary importance, and subordinate to the secular State, 
and to the needs and requirements of the existing organization of society, 
whatever it might for the time be — allodial, feudal, monarchical, or consti- 
tutional. The promptings, hopes, aspirations, and advancements of the 

130 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

individual English conscience, therefore, are entirely limited by considera- 
tions for the rights of existing society as a whole, however irrationally con- 
stituted. The good of the individual is set aside for the good of the state. 
Existing institutions, vested rights, and unequal concentrations of power, 
rank, or privilege, are to be sustained, and their claims demand and receive 
at least equal consideration with the highest claims of humanity. Hence 
arises the necessity for compromise ; concessions have to be made on both 
sides. The strong must yield a little of his substance to the weak. His 
vested rights must suffer that their opportunities may be enlarged. But the 
weak can never expect full justice from the strong. They must always act 
on the rule that half a loaf is better than no bread. Hence, the history of 
civilization and human progress in England, from the time when the land 
was seized by the strong hand of the Norman, has been merely a story of 
continually growing demands on the part of the increasing masses; con- 
tinual repulse and rejection on the part of the power-holding classes; and 
final concessions and mutual compromise on the part of both. The body 
of English laws, in consequence, is chiefly the record of half-acquired de- 
mands on the part of the people and half-granted concessions on the part of 
their lords. By far the greater portion of the power still remains in the 
hands of the representatives of those who first seized it, and the part received 
by the people is but a fraction of what would result from a justly propor- 
tioned division. 

We find, therefore, that the word " compromise " is written, cross-writ- 
ten, and under-written on almost every page of the record of English history, 
English legislation, and English statesmanship. The English statute-book 
is one long, unvarying repetition of the story of evils partially cured, of 
wrongs half-righted, and of the attempts of the framers of laws to please all 
parties concerned. The British Constitution is proverbially a patchwork 
composition, in which every man can claim that his rights are given recog- 
nition, and no two men can tell alike just what those rights are. 

The germination and growth of English liberty may be likened to that of 
a hardy oak, planted within the walls of a strong tower. In the course of 
time it grew and filled the whole of the tower, although ever circumscribed 
and prevented from reaching its full stature and extent by the impassable 
walls of stone. A day may come when it will force the foundations from 
the ground, and reach the freedom of the open air by breaking asunder the 
confining walls of its prison. Or, possibly, since the ecclesiastical mortar 
has lost its bond, the walls may fall of their own weight; for, indeed, to-day, 
monarchy in England stands much like other of the crumbling and ivy- 
covered ruins of feudal power and grandeur — slowly but surely disintegrating 
and passing away. 

In America, of course, the conditions were vastly different. Here was 
a primeval state of nature. Here began the childhood of a new world. 
Here, at the first, were none of man's injustices to man; no castles; no 

Religion 131 

oppressions of tyranny; no burdens of bishops. Naturally, the plant of liberty 
thrived and flourished from the start; and the enemies it has had since have 
been those of parasitical growth, such as become threatening only when 
suffered for too long a time to remain undisturbed. 

In Scotland, also, the liberty tree had a more favorable soil and less 
burdensome bonds than in England, and it was watered and nourished by the 
blood of many martyrs. The power of the nobles was more frequently 
opposed to that of the king, and as a result there was often a division and 
sometimes a disregard of authority. Under these conditions, the rights of 
the people were more fully regarded. Then, when John Knox stirred the 
soil and fertilized the roots with his Calvinistic doctrines of equality and 
liberty, the result was a rapid growth and a complete bursting of restricting 

Thus we may conclude that the difference between Scottish and English 
character, in its ultimate analysis, is this: the former has been developed 
chiefly by the exercise of self-control, guided by the individual conscience; 
the latter, by the discipline of authority, imposed by feudal and monarchical 
power. While it is sometimes contended that monarchy is more favorable 
to the exceptional few, and offers better promise to ambitious men, it is gener- 
ally admitted that democracy affords more opportunity for progress to the 
average man, and is therefore better in its results for the masses. However, 
the history of America shows that more of her leaders have come from the 
democratic Scotch, in proportion to their number, than from the king-loving 
English. Hence, it is to be inferred that that system of government is 
better both for leaders and followers which gives the greatest possible amount 
of individual liberty, not inconsistent with the rights of others. This insures 
perfect equality of rank and opportunity, without offering undue incentive 
to the ambition of its leading citizens. Consequently, such a system is not 
only the most desirable for the common people, but, by elevating the average 
standard of humanity, serves also to offer broader and higher aims for the 
worthy efforts of the ambitious. 


1 See Appendix G (Christianity in Early Britain). 

2 It is usual for native writers on English Church history, who seek to minimize the in- 
fluence of Rome on their religion, to ascribe the conversion of the Angles and Saxons almost 
wholly to the labors of the Scottish missionaries and the Christianized Britons who remained 
alive after the Anglian conquest. On the other hand, in recent years, Freeman and other 
native writers on English secular history attempt to show that practically none of the east- 
ern Britons survived the exterminating wars of the English invaders. While these two the- 
ories are wholly inconsistent with one another, the evidence shows the former to be no less 
erroneous than the latter. 

3 Book ii., ch. ii. 

4 Although Bede and other writers make most mention of the disputes and controversies 
respecting the celebration of Easter, and the peculiar form of clerical tonsure, and such like 

132 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

fooleries, from which some have hastily concluded that there was, after all, nothing but the 
most trifling and unessential distinctions between the Culdees [Columbans] and their Anglo- 
Roman opponents ; yet a closer examination may enable us to discover . . . that they 
differed in some points of vital importance. . . . From incidental notices ... it 
may be gathered that the Culdees were opposed to the Church of Rome in such essential 
doctrines as the following : They rejected . . . auricular confession, penance . . . 
authoritative absolution . . . transubstantiation . . . the worship of angels, saints, 
and relics, . . . praying to saints for their intercession, prayers for the dead, . . . 
works of supererogation, . . . confirmation. — Hetherington, History of the Church of 
Scotland, pp. 15, 16. The vital point of their difference, as stated by their representa- 
tives at the Whitby conference, in 664, will be found in the next succeeding extract from 
Bede. It was that they would not accept Augustine as their superior. 
6 Bk. iii. , ch. xxv. 

6 See p. 218, Note 43. 

7 See p. 305. 

England's influence and example were the direct causes of the subservience of Scot- 
land's more ancient and purer faith. This might be rendered evident did our limits permit 
us to trace minutely the successive events which led to this disastrous result ; such as the 
residence for a time in England of some of our most powerful kings, especially Malcolm 
Canmore and David I., who, returning to Scotland with their minds filled with prejudices 
in behalf of the pomp and splendor of the English Prelacy, made it their utmost endeavor 
to erect buildings and organize and endow a hierarchy which might vie in dignity and grand- 
eur with those of their more wealthy neighbors. The ruinous effects were soon apparent. 
In vain did the best of the Scottish clergy oppose these innovations ; their more ambitious 
brethren were but too ready to grasp at the proffered wealth and honor ; and at length, to 
save themselves from the usurpations of the Archbishop of Canterbury, who strove to assert 
supremacy over the Scottish church, they yielded up their spiritual liberty to the Roman 
pontiff in the year 1176. — Hetherington, History of the Church of Scotland, p. 14. 

8 See Knox's History of the Reformation, bk. i. 

9 Slavery under the Roman empire was carried on to an excess never known elsewhere, 
before or since. Christianity found it permeating and corrupting every domain of human 
life, and in six centuries of conflict succeeded in reducing it to nothing. . . . Christianity 
in the early ages never denounced slavery as a crime, never encouraged or permitted the 
slaves to rise against their masters and throw off the yoke ; yet she permeated the minds of 
both masters and slaves with ideas utterly inconsistent with the spirit of slavery. Within 
the Church, master and slave stood on an absolute equality. — W. R. Brownlow, Lectures 
on Slavery and Serfdom in Europe, lecture 1,2. 

10 It has been often shown . . . that slavery was introduced through motives of 
mercy, to prevent conquerors from killing their prisoners. Hence the Justinian code and 
also St. Augustine (De Civ. Dei., xix., 15) derived servus from servare, to preserve, be- 
cause the victor preserved his prisoners alive.— Lecky, History of European Morals, vol. 
i., pp. 101, 102. 


WITH the Scotch, the expression of the spiritual has ever been through 
religion. In art and literature they have produced less relatively 
than the English — in the North of Ireland, almost nothing. Yet it is far 
from the truth to say that Celtic genius has not found expression in lit- 
erature or art. More than once it has been pointed out that Shakespeare 
himself was born near the forest of Arden, close to the border-line between 
England and Wales. The people of the West of England to-day are prob- 
ably as much Celtic as Teutonic, and it would seem that there are at least 
no better grounds for claiming their greatest genius as a Saxon than for as- 
suming that he may have been a Briton. He is as likely to have been the 
one as the other; though if the truth could be known, it would probably be 
found that he had received an infusion of the blood and the spirit of both. 1 

Of the second greatest poet of Britain, it may be said there is vastly more 
reason for believing him to have been of purely Celtic extraction than there 
is for asserting Shakespeare's genius to have been wholly Teutonic. It is 
possible, however, that Burns, also, was of mixed descent. Rare Ben Jon- 
son, likewise, although himself born in England, was the grandson of an 
Annandale Scotchman. 

Walter Scott, James Boswell, Lord Byron, Robert L. Stevenson, Edgar 
Allan Poe, James M. Barrie, Thomas Carlyle, Washington Irving, HallCaine, 
Robert Barr, John M. Watson, S. R. Crockett, David Christie Murray, and 
William Black are writers of Scottish blood who have been given a high 
place in English literature, and some of them classed as English. In their 
days, Buchanan, Robertson, Hume, and Macaulay were perhaps the greatest 
historians Britain had produced. Those Scots have since been eclipsed by 
other writers of a more English origin ; but the latter, in turn, have been 
outdone by a Celt — one whose work, so far as it has gone, shows the most 
philosophical, judicious, and enlightened treatment of the subject of English 
history that it has yet received. This historian is Mr. W. E. H. Lecky. 

Other Scottish writers who have helped to make the fame of " English " 
literature world-wide are Tobias Smollett, William E. Aytoun, Joanna 
Baillie, M. O. W. Oliphant, Alexander Barclay, John Stuart Blackie, James 
Beattie, Robert Buchanan, John Hill Burton, Thomas Campbell, Jane Porter, 
Andrew Lang, Archibald Forbes, Benjamin Kidd, George Farquhar (of Lon- 
donderry), John Gait, George MacDonald, John Barbour, James Hogg (the 
Ettrick Shepherd), John Wilson {Christopher North), Allan Ramsay, William 
Drummond, James Pollok, William Dunbar, James Thomson (who wrote 
Rule, Britannia), James Macpherson, Charles Mackay, F. W. Robertson. 


134 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

Among the great thinkers in the fields of political and practical science 
Scotland has given to the world James Watt (the inventor of the steam- 
engine), Adam Smith, Hugh Miller, William Thomson (Lord Kelvin), Joseph 
Black, Robert Simson, John Robinson, Sir James Mackintosh, Sir Alexander 
Mackenzie, Morell Mackenzie, William Murdoch (the inventor of illuminat- 
ing-gas), John Napier (the inventor of logarithms), James Bruce, the two 
Rosses, Mungo Park, James Grant, Dugald Stewart, and David Livingstone, 
besides a legion of American scientists of the first rank. William Ewart 
Gladstone was of purely Scottish parentage. His father, born in Leith, was 
descended from a Lanarkshire farmer, and his mother, Ann Robertson, be- 
longed to the Ross-shire Robertsons. 8 James Bryce likewise is of Scottish 
descent.* In America, during the past ten years, these two men were the 
best known and most popular Britons of the decade, and Gladstone's death 
was mourned as generally on this side of the Atlantic as in Great Britain. 
Lord Rosebery, the present leader of the Liberal party in Great Britain, is 
also a Scotchman. 

Ulster can boast of the names of some of the best of the captains who 
served under Wellington; and she gave to India two men who helped 
materially to save that empire for England during the great mutiny — Henry 
and John Lawrence. Of the blood of the Ulster settlers sprang Lord Cas- 
tlereagh, George Canning, Sir Henry Pottinger, and Lord Cairns; and also 
one of the most brilliant and successful of modern administrators, Lord 
Dufferin, the inheritor of the title of one of the first of the Scottish set- 
tlers, James Hamilton, Lord Clannaboye, and the possessor of part of the 
old Scottish settlement on the south shore of Belfast Lough. 4 

In art, Scotland has produced little that is worthy; but the same remark 
applies with equal force to England. British art, as a rule, is built on foun- 
dations of conventionality rather than inspiration. Here, as in some certain 
other attributes of a refined civilization, the best examples are produced by 
Celtic France. Nevertheless, critics to-day are coming to class the Scottish 
artist, Henry Raeburn, with the world's greatest portrait painters. George 
Cruikshank, also, was the son of a father born north of the Tweed. To 
America, France, more than England, represents all that is most excellent 
in modern art. As a consequence, American artists of Scottish and Eng- 
lish ancestry are producing more excellent work than their British cousins of 
native stock. 6 

In connection with the subject of Scottish achievement, it will be appro- 
priate to give in condensed form the results of an investigation made by Mr. 
William H. Hunter, a diligent and painstaking student, who presented the 
following facts in an address delivered before the West Florida Pioneer 
Scotch Society on January 25, 1895: 

It has been said that opportunity is the father of greatness; but the 
opportunity for inventing the steam-engine obtained before the boy Watt 

Scottish Achievement 135 

played with the vapor from his mother's kettle. A Scotchman saw the op- 
portunity and grasped it, and revolutionized the forces in the hands of man. 

When we study race-building, we can understand why a Scotchman 
(Cyrus McCormick) invented the mowing-machine. John Sinclair, a Scotch- 
man of wonderful perception, organized the British Board of Agriculture. 
John Caird's writings added not a little to the advancement of agriculture. 
Henry Burden invented the cultivator, and Thomas Jefferson gave us the 
modern plough. I am also told that Longstreet, who improved the cotton- 
gin, and made possible its operation by means of steam power, was of Scot- 
tish blood. I take it that there are men here to-day who remember the 
revolution made in American farming by the introduction of the double 
Scotch harrow. 

When Michael Menzies and Andrew Meikle invented the threshing-ma- 
chine in 1788, they made it so nearly perfect in all its workings that little 
room for improvement was left for latter-day genius. The improved roads 
in most general use are made after the systems introduced by the eminent 
Scotch engineers, MacAdam and Telford. 

Watt made the first electrical apparatus, and would have continued ex- 
periments along this line, but dropped electricity to give his whole time to 
perfecting the steam-engine. . . . The honor for harnessing lightning 
to serve man as a swift messenger belongs to one through whose veins 
coursed Scotch blood — Samuel Finley Breese Morse. . . . The old- 
time telegraphers, James D. Reid, Andrew Carnegie, Robert Pitcairn, Ken- 
neth McKenzie, and David McCargo, the men who aided Morse, and made 
his system successful, are of Scotch blood. The Wizard of Menlo Park is of 
the same blood [Edison's mother was Mary Elliott]. Sir William Thomson, 
a native of Scotch-Ireland, made possible the successful operation of the 
ocean electric cables by invention of the mirror-galvanometer, which reflects 
the words noted by the electric sparks as they flash under the sea. The 
telephone was invented by Alexander Graham Bell, a Scotchman, while 
Elisha Gray, of the same blood, is at work perfecting a telotograph. . . . 
John Ericsson was born a Swede, but his biographer says of him that he 
got his genius from his mother, who was of Scottish descent. ... In 
speaking of the steamship, how many Scotch names come to mind! New- 
comen, Watt, Patrick Miller, Symington, Henry Burden, Bell, Roach, the 
American shipbuilder, and Fulton, distinguished as the first person to suc- 
cessfully propel a boat by steam. The first steam vessel to cross the Atlantic 
from America was built by a Scotchman. The Great Western, constructed 
by Henry Burden, was the first steamship to cross the ocean from Europe to 
America. The modern mariner's compass was invented by Sir William 

The possibility of a railway was first suggested by Watt. Henry Burden 
first made the peculiar spike, used to this day to fasten the rail to the cross- 
tie. Peter Cooper built the first locomotive in America. The Pennsylvania 
Railroad Company, the greatest and most powerful railroad corporation in 
the world, was brought to its present stage by the skilled efforts of such 
Scotchmen as Thomas A. Scott, William Thaw, J. N. McCullough, James 
McCrea, and Robert Pitcairn [to these names should now be added those of 
Frank Thomson and A. J. Cassatt]; while General Campbell, the manager 
of the Baltimore & Ohio system, is also a Scotchman [later John K. Cowen, 
also of Scottish blood]. During the late war between the States, the Federal 
railroad military service was under the generalship of D. C. McCullum. 
The Canadian Pacific Railroad was built by a Scotchman. 

136 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

It is a fact that Puritan ladies were taught to spin, on Boston Common, 
by Scottish immigrants from Northern Ireland ; and the great textile industry- 
was given impetus by the invention of carding and spinning machines by 
Alexander and Robert Barr, which machines were introduced by a Mr. Orr, 
also a New England Scotchman. And the inventor of the mule spinning 
machine was a Scot. Gordon McKay invented the sole-stitching that revo- 
lutionized shoemaking in New England. 

The first iron-furnace west of the Alleghany Mountains was erected by a 
Scotchman named Grant, in 1794. At this mill, the cannon-balls used by 
Perry in the battle of Lake Erie were made. John Campbell, a stalwart 
Ohio Scot, first employed the hot-blast in making pig-iron. 

The Scotch author is eminent in every line of literary production. We 
could rest our honors with Hume, Carlyle, Scott, and Burns, and hold a high 
place in the world of letters. Adam Smith was the first person to write of 
political economy as a science, which theme has been also treated by Samuel 
Baily, J. R. McCullough, Chalmers, and Alison. Scotland gave the literary 
world Barbour, Blind Harry, Gavin Douglas, Wyntoun, Dunbar, McKenzie, 
Wilson, Grant, Barrie, George MacDonald, and John Stuart Blackie. . . . 
Scotland gave to America Washington Irving. . . . Mrs. Margaret Wil- 
son Oliphant is of our blood, and also Robert Louis Stevenson. What author 
of fiction has received fuller attention than John Maclaren Watson ? 

The Scot has been a voluminous writer of theology from the days of John 
Knox, the real hero of the Reformation. You all know that, of the six 
ablest British sermonizers — Alison, Irving, Chalmers, Robertson, Robert 
Hall, and Spurgeon — the first four mentioned were Scotch. 

Hugh Miller told us the story of the rocks. To Scotland we are in- 
debted for William McLuce, the father of American geology, undertaking, 
as he did, as a private enterprise, the geological survey of the United States, 
visiting each State and Territory, and publishing his maps six years prior to 
publication of the Smith geological map of England. The Owens — David, 
Richard, and Robert Dale — were men of the highest attainments in the field 
of American geology, the latter, at his death, having the finest museum and 
laboratory on the Western Continent. Andrew Ramsey, who was the director- 
general of the Geological Survey of Great Britain, was a Scot. 

Nicholl, Keill, and Ferguson, the noted astronomers, were Scotchmen. 
The most learned of American astronomers was General Armsby McKnight 
Mitchell. . . . Maria Mitchell, another Scotch-American astronomer, 
had the distinction of receiving a medal from the King of Denmark. 

No other race has produced a greater mathematician than John Napier, 
the most distinguished of the British writers on the science of numbers. 
Has Germany produced men of larger grasp of thought along this line than 
James Beattie or Andrew Baxter, than Sir William Hamilton or Doctor 
Abercrombie ? Neil Arnott was the first person to illustrate scientific prin- 
ciples in the language of common life, his work being so popular that it ran 
through five editions in six years. Robert and James Holdams, the philos- 
ophers, Spencer Fullerton Baird, the most noted American naturalist, Alex- 
ander Wilson, the ornithologist, Samuel Mitchell, who published the first 
scientific periodical in the United States, Lindley Murray, the philologist — 
all were Scots, and all authorities in their respective fields of research. Dr. 
Clay McCauley, the noted Scotch Unitarian of Boston, is at the head of the 
Senshin Sacknin, or school of advanced learning belonging to this church in 
Japan. Who has written on the science of botany with greater clearness 
than John H. Balfour ? Was there ever a scholar of wider distinction for 

Scottish Achievement 137 

comprehensive treatment of botany than Asa Gray, the descendant of a 
New England Scotch family ? W. R. Smith, a Scotchman, has been for 
years superintendent of the Government Botanical Gardens. 

That distinguished Scotch anatomist, John Abernethy, the father of 
modern surgery, revolutionized this science. Dr. J. Y. Simpson was the 
first person to use chloroform as an anaesthetic in the practice of surgery. 
Ephraim McDowell's skill found new fields in operative surgery, and he 
became noted in Europe as well as in America. No race has given to 
medicine the superiors of William and John Hunter, of Matthew Bailie, or 
John Barclay. If one were to ask who have been the four most noted sur- 
geons and medical doctors in America, the answer would be: Hamilton, 
Hammond, Hays Agnew, and Weir Mitchell, all of Scotch blood. 

As early as 1795, Dr. Thornton called attention to the possibility of teach- 
ing the deaf and dumb to talk, and Alexander Bell introduced the system for 
instructing the deaf and dumb, invented by his Scotch father. John Alston 
was the inventor of the blind alphabet, and John Gall printed in English the 
first book for the blind. 

Gedd, the inventor of stereotyping, was a Scotchman. The Scot also 
gave us the lightning presses. Scott, Gordon, and Campbell are of our 
blood. David Bruce, the pioneer type-maker, the inventor of the type- 
casting machine, introduced the Gedd process in America. Archibald 
Binney and James Ronaldson established the first type foundry in Phila- 
delphia. To Bruce and the McKellars we are greatly indebted for the ad- 
vanced position our country holds to-day in this great industry. The first 
American newspaper, the News-Letter, was published in Boston by John 
Campbell. William Maxwell, a Scotchman, published at Cincinnati the first 
newspaper in the Northwest Territory; and the first religious paper in the 
United States was published at Chillicothe, Ohio, by a Scotchman. 

In sculpture, Scotland has given to England and America their finest 
artists. William Calder Marshall, and not an Englishman, won the prize 
offered by the British government for a design for the Wellington monument. 
Sir John Steele executed the colossal statue of Burns that adorns New 
York's beautiful park. John C. King, the New England sculptor, whose 
busts of Adams and Emerson are masterpieces of plastic art, and whose 
cameos of Webster and Lincoln are magnificent gems, was a Scot; as was 
Joel Hart, whose statues of Clay at Richmond and New Orleans are exten- 
sively admired. Crawford and Ward are of our blood; and where is there 
a Scot whose heart does not beat with pride in the knowledge that Scotch 
blood courses in the veins of Frederick Macmonnies ? There is no end to 
Scotch painters. Sir David Wilkie was perhaps the most noted of British 
artists. Then there were Francis Brant and William Hart. Some of the 
works of Alexander Johnston are among the world's masterpieces. David 
Allan's pen drew the familiar illustrations to Burns's lyrics. There was an 
academy of art in Glasgow before there was one in London. Guthrie, Mac- 
Gregor, Walton, Lavery, Patterson, Roche, and Stevenson all have been 
eminent painters. Gilbert Stuart, who left us portraits of prominent actors 
in early American history, was a Scot, as was E. F. Andrews, who has given 
America its best portraits of Jefferson, Martha Washington, and Dolly Madi- 
son, those which hang in the White House. Alexander Anderson was the 
first American wood-engraver, inventing, as he did, the tools used by those 
pursuing this art. 

No other race has produced explorers of greater achievement than Mac- 
kenzie, Richardson, Ross, Collison, McClintock [Melville, Greely], or Hays. 

138 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

John and Clark Ross made the only valuable discoveries ever made in the 
Antarctic region; while David Livingstone, Mungo Park, Doctor Johnson 
[James Grant], and Doctor Donaldson penetrated Darkest Africa. Thomas 
Hutchins, the first geographer of the United States, was Scotch. So were 
James Geddes and Samuel Forrer, the pioneer engineers of the Northwest 
Territory. Commodore Matthew Galbraith Perry, one of the famous family 
of sailors, broke down the walls of Japan, and let in the light of Western 
civilization. The Perrys got their great force of character from their mother, 
who was Scotch. For thirty years Sir Robert Hart was at the head of the 
Chinese financial system, and opened to commerce many Chinese ports, 
while Samuel M. Bryan was for a dozen years the Postmaster-General of 
Japan, and introduced into that empire the Western postal system. 

Do we speak of war, a thousand Scotch names rise above all the heroes: 
Wallace at Stirling; Bruce at Bannockburn; Wolfe's Scottish soldiers at the 
Heights of Abraham; Forbes at Fort Duquesne; Stark at Bennington; 
Campbell at King's Mountain; Scott at Lundy's Lane; Perry on Lake Erie; 
Grant at Appomattox. Were not Wellington and Napier Scotch ? The 
latter was. 

Paul Jones was only one of the naval heroes of our blood. Oliver 
Hazard Perry captured a whole British fleet in the battle of Lake Erie, 
building his own ships on the bank of the lake. Perry's mother was an 
Alexander; and it is a fact not mentioned in histories published in New 
England, that for years after, the victory on Lake Erie was called Mrs. 
Perry's victory, by neighbors of the family in Rhode Island. Thomas 
McDonough, of Lake Champlain, Stewart, and Bailey were Scots. Isaac 
Newton, who had charge of the turret and engine of the Monitor, in its clash 
with the Merrimac, was of the same blood. Alexander Murray commanded 
the Constitution ; and William Kidd, the daring pirate, was also a Scotchman. 

In the American Civil War the Scotch- American generals of the Federal 
Army from Ohio alone made our race conspicuous in skill of arms. Grant 
was a Scotchman. His [father's] people came direct to America, and first 
settled in Connecticut [his mother's people were of Pennsylvania Scotch- 
Irish stock]. New England gave the country not only Stark and Knox, but 
Grant and McClellan, as well as Salmon P. Chase and Hugh McCulloch. 
But I was speaking of Ohio. The McDowells, the Mitchells, the McPher- 
sons, the Fighting McCooks (two families having nine general officers in the 
field), the Gibsons, the Hayeses, the Gilmores, all were Ohio Scots. General 
Gilmore, you will remember, revolutionized naval gunnery in his cannonade 
and capture of Fort Pulaski, which extended his fame throughout Europe. 
Gilmore, the " Swamp Angel," as he was called, was an Ohio Scotchman. 
A majority of the Indian fighters in the Northwest during the Revolu- 
tionary period were Scotchmen and Scotch-Irishmen, whose achievements 
are history. The McCullochs, the Lewises, the McKees, the Crawfords, 
the Pattersons, the Johnstons, and their fellow Scots won the West. George 
Rogers Clark made complete conquest of the Northwest, giving to free gov- 
ernment five great States that otherwise would have been under the British 
flag. The truth about Ohio is, it has been Scotch from its first governor, 
Arthur St. Clair, down to the present [1895] chief executive, William 
McKinley. In the list of governors, we find Duncan McArthur, Jeremiah 
Morrow (or Murray), the father of the national road and of Ohio's internal 
improvements, Allen Trimble, who introduced the public-school system into 
Ohio, Rutherford B. Hayes, who became President of the United States, 
James E. Campbell, and William McKinley, who is likely to be a candidate 

Scottish Achievement 139 

of one of the political parties for the office of President [of the six Presidents 
born in, or who were elected to office from, Ohio — Harrison, Grant, Hayes, 
Garfield, Harrison, and McKinley — four were of Scottish descent]. 

Professor Hinsdale, an Ohio historian of Puritan extraction, wrote this bit 
of truth: " The triumph of James Wolfe and his Highlanders on the Heights 
of Abraham, and not the embattled farmers of Lexington, won the first vic- 
tory of the American Revolution." And did it come by mere chance that 
another Scotchman, in the person of General John Forbes, at about the 
same time, led the English forces that reduced Fort Duquesne at the con- 
fluence of the three rivers, and opened the gateway to the boundless west for 
the forward march of Anglo-Saxon civilization ? Did it come by chance 
that James Grant was the commander in the relief of Lucknow; that the 
unmatched Havelock led Scottish soldiers in his Asiatic campaigns which 
brought such lustre to British arms ? We have a right to manifest pride in 
the fact that of the four field commanders-in-chief in the Civil War, three 
were Scotch — Scott, McClellan, and Grant. Chinese Gordon was a Scot. 
Through the veins of Robert E. Lee flowed the blood of Robert Bruce. 
Ulysses S. Grant and Jefferson Davis were descendants of the same Scotch 
family of Simpson. 

Statesmen ? If Scotland had given to civil government only the name 
of Gladstone, she might ever glow with a mother's pride. Erskine, too, was 
a Scotchman, and considered by many writers the ablest and most eloquent 
of the long line of British jurists whose influence was most potent in giving 
England freer government, and withal the most vigorous defender of consti- 
tutional liberty born on British soil. Jefferson, the author of the Declaration 
of Independence, and of the law providing for religious tolerance; Madison, 
the father of the Constitution, Monroe, [Jackson], Polk, [Taylor], Buchanan, 
Johnson, Grant, Hayes, [Arthur, Harrison, McKinley], are Presidents our 
race has given to the United States. Daniel Webster was of Scottish blood; 
so were the intellectual giants, Benjamin Wade and Joshua Giddings. Wade's 
Puritan father was so poor in purse that the son was educated at the knee of 
his Scotch Presbyterian mother. McLean and Burnet, two of the ablest 
lawyers and statesmen of the West, were Scots. With one exception, all the 
members of Washington's Cabinet were of the same virile blood ; as were like- 
wise three out of four of the first justices of the United States Supreme Court. 

In finance, the Scotch are no less distinguished than in other lines of 
endeavor. William Paterson was the founder of the Bank of England, and 
Alexander Hamilton established the American system of finance. Both were 

The accepted notion that all the Scotch get their theology from Calvin is 
incorrect. Charles Pettit Mcllvaine, perhaps the ablest bishop of the Prot- 
estant Episcopal Church in America, and certainly one of the most profound 
educators on this continent, was a Scotchman by descent. Bishop Matthew 
Simpson was without question the ablest prelate of the Methodist Episcopal 
Church in America. James Dempster, whom John Wesley sent to America 
as a missionary, was a Scotchman, and his son, John Dempster, was the 
founder of the school of theology of the Boston University. " Father 
McCormick," as he was called, organized the first Methodist Episcopal 
church in the Northwest Territory. John Rankin was the founder of the 
Free Presbyterian, and Alexander Campbell of the Christian Disciples' 
Church. Robert Turnbull was the most scholarly divine of the New Eng- 
land Baptist Church. Edward Robinson, of the Puritan Church, was recog- 
nized as the ablest American biblical scholar. While referring to scholars, 

140 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

I must not neglect to mention the fact that James Blair founded William and 
Mary College in Virginia; that Princeton is a Scotch institution; that Doctor 
Alexander founded Augusta Academy, now the great Washington and Lee 
University; that Jefferson gave the South the University of Virginia; that 
Doctor John McMillan and the Finleys established more than a dozen col- 
leges in the West and South; that Doctor Charles C. Beatty established the 
first woman's college west of the Alleghany Mountains; and that Joseph Ray, 
William H. McGuffey, and Lindley Murray were three of America's most 
prominent educators. 


1 It seems certain that William Shakespeare was at least in part of Celtic descent. He was 
a grandson of Richard Shakespeare, Bailiff of Wroxhall, by Alys, daughter of Edward Griffin 
of Berswell. Edward Griffin was of the Griffin or Griffith family of Baybrook in Northamp- 
tonshire, who claimed descent from Griffith, son of Rhysap Tudor, King of South Wales. 
See The Gentle Shakespeare : A Vindication, by John Pym Yeatman, of Lincoln's Inn, 
London, 1896. See also p. 314, Note 13. 

2 John Gladstanes, of Toftcombes, near Biggar, in the upper ward of Lanarkshire, was a 
small farmer, who married Janet Aitken ; their son, Thomas, who died in 1809, settled in 
Leith, where he was a prosperous merchant, and where he married Helen Neilson, of Spring- 
field ; their son John, born in 1764, married, 1800, Ann Robertson, daughter of Andrew, a 
native of Dingwall, in Ross-shire ; John and his wife settled in Liverpool, where, in 1809, 
their son, William Ewart Gladstone, was born. 

3 Rev. James Bryce (1767-1857) went from Scotland, where he was born, to Ireland, and 
settled in 1805, as minister of the anti-burgher church in Killaig, County Londonderry. His 
son, James Bryce (1806-1877) was born in Killaig (near Coleraine). In 1846, appointed to 
the High School, Glasgow. (See Dictionary of National Biography \ to which the information 
contained in the article on the Bryces was furnished by the family.) James Bryce, the writer 
of The American Commonwealth, the son and grandson of the persons just mentioned, was 
born in Belfast, Ireland, May 10, 1838. His mother was Margaret, eldest daughter of James 
Young, Esquire, of Abbeyville, County Antrim. (See Men and Women of the Time, thirteenth 
edition, 1891.) — Samuel Swett Green, The Scotch-Irish in America, p. 34. 

4 " T C ," a writer in Eraser's Magazine for August, 1876, makes the following 

observations on the character and achievements of the Scotch in Ulster : 

" Ulstermen have been described as a mongrel community. This is true in a sense. 
They are neither Scotch, English, nor Irish, but a mixture of all three ; and they are an 
ingredient in the Irish population distinguished by habits of thought, character, and utterance 
entirely unlike the people who fill the rest of the island. It is easy to see, however, at a 
single glance that the foundation of Ulster society is Scotch. This is the solid granite on 
which it rests. There are districts of country — especially along the eastern coast, running 
sixty or seventy miles, from the Ards of Down to the mouth of the Foyle — in which the 
granite crops out on the surface, as we readily observe by the Scottish dialect of the peasan- 
try. Only twenty miles of sea separate Ulster from Scotland at one point ; and just as the 
Grampians cross the channel to rise again in the mountains of Donegal, there seems to be no 
break in the continuity of race between the two peoples that inhabit the two opposite coasts. 
Thus it comes to pass that much of the history of Ulster is a portion of Scottish history 
inserted into that of Ireland ; a stone in the Irish mosaic of an entirely different color and 
quality from the pieces that surround it. James I., colonized Ulster in the seventeenth cen- 
tury, not with the Gaelic Scots, who might have coalesced with their kindred Celts in Ireland, 
but with that Lowland rural population who from the very first fixed the moral and religious 
tone of the entire province. Ireland was then called ' the back door of Great Britain ' ; and 

Scottish Achievement 141 

James I. was anxious to place a garrison there that would be able not only to shut the door, 
but to keep it shut, in the face of his French or Spanish enemies ; and, accordingly, when an 
attempt was made at the Revolution to force the door, the garrison was there — the advanced 
outpost of English power — to shut it in the face of the planter's grandson, and so to save the 
liberties of England at the most critical moment in its history. One may see (as Hugh Miller 
did) in the indomitable firmness of the besieged at Derry the spirit of their ancestors under 
Wallace and Bruce, and recognize in the gallant exploits of the Enniskillen men under 
Gustavus Hamilton, routing two of the forces despatched to attack them, and compelling a 
third to retire, a repetition of the thrice-fought and thrice-won battle of Roslin. . . . 

" It is now time to notice the character and ways of the Ulsterman, not the Celt of 
Ulster, who gives nothing distinctive to its society, — for he is there what he is in Munster or 
Connaught, only with a less degree of vivacity and wit, — but the Scotch-Irishman, inheriting 
from Scotland that Norse nature often crossed no doubt with Celtic blood, the one giving 
him his persistency, the other a touch of impulsiveness to which Ulster owes so much of its 
progress and prosperity. He represents the race which has been described as 4 the vertebral 
column of Ulster, giving it at once its strength and uprightness ' — a race masculine alike in 
its virtues and faults — solid, sedate, and plodding — and distinguished both at home and 
abroad by shrewdness of head, thoroughgoing ways, and moral tenacity. The Ulsterman is, 
above all things, able to stand alone, and to stand firmly on his own feet. He is called ' the 
sturdy Northern,' from his firmness and independence and his adherence to truth and pro- 
bity. He is thoroughly practical. He studies uses, respects common things, and cultivates 
the prose of human life. The English despise the Irish as aimless, but not the man of 
Ulster, who has a supreme eye to facts, and is 'locked and bolted to results.' There is a 
business-like tone in his method of speaking. He never wastes a word, yet on occasion he 
can speak with volubility. He is as dour and dogged on occasion as a Scotchman, with, how- 
ever, generally less of that infusion of sternness — so peculiarly Scotch — which is really the 
result of a strong habitual relation between thought and action. English tourists notice the 
stiff and determined manner of the Ulsterman in his unwillingness to give way to you at fair 
or market, on the ground that one man is as good as another. The Ulsterman, no matter 
what his politics, is democratic in spirit ; and his loyalty is not personal, like that of the Celt, 
but rather a respect for institutions. He has something, too, of the Scotch pugnacity of 
mind, and always seems, in conversation, as if he were afraid of making too large admissions. 
Mr. Matthew Arnold speaks of ' sweet reasonableness ' as one of the noblest elements of cul- 
ture and national life. The Ulsterman has the reasonableness, but he is not sweet. A 
southern Irishman says of him : ' The Northerns, like their own hills, are rough but health- 
some, and, though often plain-spoken even to bluntness, there is no kinder-hearted peasantry 
in the world.' But he is certainly far inferior to the Celtic Irishman in good manners and in 
the art of pleasing. Though not so reserved or grave as the Scotchman, and with rather more 
social talent, he is inferior to the Southern in pliancy, suppleness, and bonhomie. He hates 
ceremony and is wanting in politeness. He is rough and ready, and speaks his mind without 
reserve. He has not the silky flattery and courteous tact of the Southern. A Killarney beg- 
garman will utter more civil things in half an hour to a stranger than an Ulsterman in all his 
life ; but the Ulsterman will retort that the Southern is ' too sweet to be wholesome.' Cer- 
tainly, if an Ulsterman does not care about you, he will neither say nor look as if he did. 
You know where to find him ; he is no hypocrite. The Celt, with his fervent and fascinating 
manner, far surpasses him in making friends whom he will not always keep ; while the Ulster- 
man, not so attractive a mortal at the outset, improves upon acquaintance, and is considera- 
bly more stanch in his friendships. Strangers say the mixture of Protestant fierte with 
good-nature and good-humor gives to the Ulsterman a tone rather piquant than unpleasing. 
Like some cross-grained woods, he admits of high polish, and when chastened by culture and 
religion, he turns out a very high style of man. He differs from the Celt, again, in the way 
he takes his pleasures ; for he follows work with such self-concentration that he never thinks 

r ~h e 

142 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

of looking about him, like the Celt, for objects to amuse or excite. He has few holidays (unlike 
the Celt, whose holidays take all the temper out of labor), and he hardly knows how to employ 
them except in party processions. 

" The Ulsterman is not imaginative or traditional, chiefly, because his affections strike no 
deep root into Irish history. The Celt is more steeped in poetry and romance ; the Ulsterman 
knows almost nothing of fairy mythology, or of the love of semi-historic legend which fires 
the imagination of the Celt. The ghost is almost the exclusive property of the ancient race. 
The Ulsterman has certainly lost his share, or at least his interest, in such things, although he 
is surrounded, like the Celt, by all the old monuments of pagan times, each with a memory 
and a tale as gray as the stone itself. It is probably because he is so imaginative that the 
Celt has not such a real possession of the present as the Ulsterman ; for those who think too 
much of a splendid past, whether it be real or imaginary, are usually apt to think too little of 
the present, and the remark has been made that the poetry of the Celt is that of a race that has 
seen better days, for there is an almost total want of the fine old Norse spirit of self-reliance, 
and of making the best possible use of the present. In one of his fits of despondency, Goethe 
envied America its freedom from ruined castles, useless remembrances, and vain disputes, 
which entangle old nations and trouble their hearts while they ought to be strong for present 
action. Certainly the Ulsterman has not allowed himself to be encumbered in any such way. 

" People have said of Ulstermen, as they have said of the Scotchmen, that they are des- 
titute of wit and humor ; but they certainly have wut, if they have not wit, and as practised 
in the northeastern part of the province, it corresponds very nearly with what is properly 
humor. It has not the spontaneity, the freshness, the oddity, the extravagance of Celtic 
humor, which upsets our gravity on the instant ; it has not the power of ' pitching it strong ' 
or ' drawing the long-bow ' like the humor of America ; nor has it the sparkling and volatile 
characteristics of French wit. It is dry, caustic, and suggestive, on the whole rather reticent 
of words, and, in fact, very Scotch in character ; and the fun is contained rather in the whole 
series of conceptions called up by a set of anecdotes and stories than by any smart quip or 
flash at the close. Often the humor, as in Scotland, lies not in what is said but in what is 
suggested, the speaker all the while apparently unconscious of saying anything to excite amuse- 
ment or laughter. Many of the illustrations are, like those of Dean Ramsay, of an ecclesias- 
tical character ; for the Ulsterman, like the Scotchman, makes religion a condition of social 
existence, and demands with an unsparing rigor, on the part of all his neighbors, a certain par- 
ticipation in the ordinances of religion. . . . 

4 ' We need hardly say that Presbyterianism runs strong in the native current of Ulster 
blood. It has a good deal of the douce Davie Dean type, and is resolutely opposed to all 
religious innovations. It was Dean Swift who said, when he saw the stone-cutters effacing 
the cherub faces from the old stonework of an Episcopal church which was to do duty as a 
Presbyterian edifice, ' Look at these rascally Presbyterians, chiselling the very Popery out of 
the stones ! ' Mr. Froude says it was the one mistake of Swift's life, that he misunderstood 
the Presbyterians. It is not generally known that there was a Janet Geddes in Ulster. At the 
Restoration, the celebrated Jeremy Taylor appointed an Episcopal successor at Comber, 
County Down, to replace an excellent Presbyterian worthy, who refused conformity. The 
women of the parish collected, pulled the new clergyman out of the pulpit, and tore his white 
surplice to ribbons. They were brought to trial at Downpatrick, and one of the female wit- 
nesses made the following declaration : ' And maun a' tell the truth, the haile truth, and 
naethin but the truth ? ' ' You must,' was the answer. ' Weel, then,' was her fearless avowal, 
4 these are the hands that poo'd the white sark ower his heed.' It is Presbyterianism that 
has fixed the religious tone of the whole province, though the Episcopalians possess, likewise, 
much of the religious vehemence of their neighbors, and have earned among English High 
Churchmen the character of being Puritan in their spirit and theology. 

" Arthur Helps, in one of his pleasant essays, says that the first rule for success in life is 
to get yourself born, if you can, north of the Tweed ; and we should say it would not be a 

Scottish Achievement 143 

bad sort of advice to an Irishman to get himself born, if possible, north of the Boyne. . . . 
He might have to part with something of his quickness of perception, his susceptibility to 
external influence, and his finer imagination ; but he would gain in working-power, and 
especially in the one great quality indispensable to success — self-containedness, steadiness, 
impassibility to outward excitements or distracting pleasures. It is this good quality, together 
with his adaptability, that accounts for the success of the Ulsterman in foreign countries. 
He may be hard in demeanor, pragmatical in mind, literal and narrow, almost without a 
spark of imagination ; but he is the most adaptable of men, and accepts people he does not 
like in his grave, stiff way, reconciling himself to the facts or the facts to himself. He pushes 
along quietly to his proper place, not using his elbows too much, and is not hampered by 
traditions like the Celt. He succeeds particularly well in America and in India, not because 
Ulstermen help one another and get on like a corporation ; for he is not clannish like the 
Scottish Highlanders or the Irish Celts, the last of whom unfortunately stick together like 
bees, and drag one another down instead of up. No foreign people succeed in America unless 
they mix with the native population. It is out of Ulster that her hardy sons have made the 
most of their talents. It was an Ulsterman of Donegal, Francis Makemie, who founded 
American Presbyterianism in the early part of the last century, just as it was an Ulsterman of 
the same district, St. Columbkille, who converted the Picts of Scotland in the sixth century. 
Four of the Presidents of the United States and one Vice-president have been of Ulster ex- 
traction : James Monroe [?], James Knox Polk, John C. Calhoun, and James Buchanan. 
General Andrew Jackson was the son of a poor Ulster emigrant who settled in North Carolina 
towards the close of the last century. ' I was born somewhere,' he said, ' between Carrick- 
fergus and the United States.' Bancroft and other historians recognize the value of the 
Scotch-Irish element in forming the society of the Middle and Southern States. It has been 
the boast of Ulstermen that the first general who fell in the American war of the Revolution 
was an Ulsterman — Richard Montgomery, who fought at the siege of Quebec ; that Samuel 
Finley, president of Princeton College, and Francis Allison, pronounced by Stiles, the presi- 
dent of Yale, to be the greatest classical scholar in the United States, had a conspicuous place 
in educating the American mind to independence ; that the first publisher of a daily paper in 
America was a Tyrone man named Dunlap ; that the marble palace of New York, where the 
greatest business in the world is done by a single firm, was the property of the late Alexander 
T. Stewart, a native of Lisburn, County Down ; that the foremost merchants, such as the 
Browns and Stewarts, are Ulstermen ; and that the inventors of steam-navigation, telegraphy, 
and the reaping machine — Fulton, Morse, and McCormick — are either Ulstermen or the 
sons of Ulstermen. 

" Ulster can also point with pride to the distinguished career of her sons in India. The 
Lawrences, Henry and John, — the two men by whom, regarding merely the human instru- 
ments employed, India has been preserved, rescued from anarchy, and restored to a position 
of a peaceful and progressive dependency, — were natives of County Derry. Sir Robert 
Montgomery was born in the city of Derry ; Sir James Emerson Tennant was a native of 
Belfast ; Sir Francis Hincks is a member of an Ulster family remarkable for great variety of 
talent. While Ulster has given one viceroy to India, it has given two to Canada in the per- 
sons of Lord Lisgar and Lord Dufferin. Sir Henry Pottinger, who attained celebrity as a 
diplomatist, and was afterward appointed governor-general of Hong Kong, was a native of 
Belfast. Besides the gallant General Nicholson, Ulster has given a whole gazetteful of heroes 
to India. It has always taken a distinguished place in the annals of war. An Ulsterman 
was with Nelson at Trafalgar, another with Wellington at Waterloo. General Rollo Gilles- 
pie, Sir Robert Kane, Lord Moira, and the Chesneys were all from County Down. Ulster- 
men have left their mark on the world's geography as explorers, for they furnished Sir John 
Franklin with the brave Crozier, from Banbridge, his second in command, and then sent an 
Ulsterman, McClintock, to find his bones, and another Ulsterman, McClure, to discover the 
passage Franklin had sought in vain. . . . 


144 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

"We have already spoken of the statesmanlike ability of Ulstermen abroad. Mention 
may now be made of at least one statesman at home — Lord Castlereagh — who was a native 
of County Down, and the son of the first Marquis of Londonderry, who was a Presbyterian 
elder till the day of his death. The name of Castlereagh may not be popular in any part of 
Ireland on account of the bloody recollections of the rebellion of 1798 ; but his reputation as 
a statesman has undoubtedly risen of late years, for it is now known that he was not such an 
absolutist or ultraist as has been generally imagined. He possessed in perfection the art of 
managing men, and excelled as a diplomatist, while he had an enormous capacity for work as 
an administrator. For most of his career he had a very remarkable man for his private sec- 
retary, Alexander Knox, a native of Derry, whose literary remains have been edited by 
Bishop Jebb, and whose conversational powers are said to have recalled those of Dr. Johnson 
himself. Lord Macaulay calls him ' an altogether remarkable man.' George Canning, the 
statesman who detached England from the influences of Continental despotism and restored 
her to her proper place in Europe, who was the first minister to perceive the genius and abilities 
of Wellington, and who opened that ' Spanish ulcer ' which Napoleon at St. Helena declared 
to be the main cause of his ruin, was the son of a Derry gentleman of ancient and respectable 
family. Lord Plunket, who was equally celebrated in politics, law, and oratory, was a native 
of Enniskillen, where his father, the Rev. Thomas Plunket, was a minister of the Presbyterian 
Church. To come down nearer to our own times, three men who have made their mark on 
the national politics of Ireland — John Mitchell, Charles Gavan Duffy, and Isaac Butt — 
belong to Ulster. The first was the son of a Unitarian minister, and was born in County 
Derry ; the second is the son of a County Monaghan farmer ; the third, the son of the late 
rector of Stranorlar parish in County Donegal. An Ulsterman — Lord Cairns — now [1876] 
presides over the deliberations of the House of Lords. 

" But we must speak of the more purely intellectual work of Ulstermen, in the walks of 
literature, science, and philosophy. It has been remarked that, though their predominant 
qualities are Scotch, they have not inherited the love of abstract speculation. Yet they have 
produced at least one distinguished philosopher in the person of Sir Francis Hutchison, pro- 
fessor of moral philosophy in the University of Glasgow in the last century, and, if we may 
follow the opinion of Dr. McCosh, the true founder of the Scottish school of philosophy. He 
was born at Saintfield, County Down, where his father was a Presbyterian minister. In 
natural science, Ulster can boast of Sir Hans Sloane, a native of Killyleagh, County Down ; 
of Dr. Black, the famous chemist, a native of Belfast ; of Dr. James Thompson and his son, 
Sir William Thompson, both natives of County Down ; and of William Thomson and Robert 
Patterson, both of Belfast. In theology and pulpit oratory, Ulstermen have always taken a 
distinguished place. If Donegal produced a deistical writer so renowned as John Toland, 
Fermanagh reared the theologian who was to combat the whole school of Deism in the person 
of the Rev. Charles Leslie, the author of A Short and Easy Method with the Deists. The 
masterly treatise of Dr. William Magee, Archbishop of Dublin, on the doctrine of the atone- 
ment still holds its place in theological literature. He was an Enniskillener, like Plunket, 
and his grandson, the present bishop of Peterborough, is one of the most eloquent divines on 
the English bench. There is no religious body, indeed, in Ulster, that cannot point to at 
least one eminent theologian with a fame far extending beyond the province. The Presby- 
terians are proud of the reputation of the Rev. Henry Cooke, of Belfast ; the Unitarians, of 
the Rev. Henry Montgomery, of Dunmurry, near Belfast ; the Baptists of the Rev. Alexander 
Carson, of Tubbermore, County Derry, the author of the ablest treatise ever written on behalf 
of Baptist principles ; the Methodists, of Dr. Adam Clarke, the learned commentator on the 
Scriptures, who was born at Maghera, in the same county ; and the Covenanters, of the Rev. 
John Paul, who had all the logical acuteness of a schoolman. In oratory, Ulstermen are 
proud of the great abilities of Plunket, Cooke, Montgomery, Isaac Butt, and Lord Cairns. 
In pure scholarship they name Dr. Archibald Maclaine, chaplain at The Hague, and 
translator of Mosheim's History ; Dr. Edward Hincks, of Killyleagh, County Down, the 

Scottish Achievement 145 

decipherer of the Nineveh tablets ; and Dr. Samuel Davidson, the eminent biblical scholar 
and critic. . . . 

" Ulster claims the sculptor, Patrick McDowell ; and Crawford, whose works adorn the 
Capitol at Washington, was born, we believe, at sea, his parents being emigrants from the 
neighborhood of Ballyshannon , County Donegal. But we cannot remember a single painter, 
or musical composer, or singer, who belongs to Ulster. In the art of novel-writing there is 
William Carleton, already referred to, the most realistic sketcher of Irish character who has 
ever lived, and who far excels Lever, and Lover, and Edgeworth in the faithfulness of his 
pictures, though he fails in the broader representations of Hibernian humor. No one has so 
well sounded the depths of the Irish heart, or so skilfully portrayed its kinder and nobler 
feelings. Ulster was never remarkable for pathos. Carleton is an exception ; but he belonged 
to the ancient race, and first saw the light in the home of a poor peasant in Clogher, County 
Tyrone. The only other novel-writers that Ulster can boast of — none of them at all equal 
in national flavor to Carleton — are Elizabeth Hamilton, the author of The Cottagers of 
Glenburnie, who lived at the beginning of this century ; William H. Maxwell, the author of 
Stories of Waterloo ; Captain Mayne Reid, the writer of sensational tales about Western 
America; Francis Browne; and Mrs. Riddle, the author of George Geith. In dramatic 
literature, Ulster can boast of George Farquhar, the author of The Beaux' Stratagem, who was 
the son of a Derry clergyman, and of Macklin, the actor as well as the author, known to us 
by his play The Man of the World. The only names it can boast of in poetry are Samuel 
Ferguson, the author of The Forging of the Anchor ; William Allingham, the author of 
Laurence Bloomfield y with two or three of lesser note." 

6 The affinity between France and America is not limited to the latter's appreciation and 
imitation in matters of art alone. At an early day in the history of this country, that affinity 
extended far beyond the bounds of sesthetical amenities. It included the fields of politics, of 
science, and of warfare. The reason for this is not far to seek. There are many people in 
America who never will, nor do they care to, understand aright the history of the building of 
the American nation ; and to these people the idea of such a thing as a close bond of union 
and sympathy with France, which for so long a time obviously existed in America, is one of 
the things which they cannot explain, and for which they can only account by classing it as 
an anomaly. To honest students of their country's history, however, and to all who can see 
beyond their own immediate community or horizon, it is evident that there was no anomaly 
in a Franco- American alliance ; and that to a very large proportion of the American people 
whose forefathers were here in pre-Revolutionary days, such a union was quite as much to be 
expected as, at other times, would be an alliance with England. The Ancient League between 
Scotland and France, which existed from before the time of Bruce until the days of Knox, was 
an alliance for defence and offence against the common enemy of both ; and that League was the 
veritable prototype of the later alliance between America and France against the same enemy. 



THE English Church Establishment owed its origin primarily to the vices 
of Henry VIII., 1 a prince whose abnormal appetite for new wives led 
him into excesses too great even for the absolution of the Roman pontiff ; 
though it is altogether likely that Henry's divorce of Catherine of Aragon 
was refused by the Pope more because it menaced the papal ascendancy 
than because it troubled the papal conscience. Organized under such cir- 
cumstances, Henry's " Church " naturally obeyed in all things the will of 
its creator; and, as the conditions required, it was afterwards the pander, 
flatterer, or main coadjutor of his various successors; so that, down to the 
beginning of the present century the religion of the loyal Englishman, as com- 
pared with that of others, had in it more that was of a secular nature, and 
in all things subordinate to the State. The English Episcopalian has until 
recently been taught that the king is the supreme head of the " Church," 
and his universal worship of the royal fetich is, perhaps, nothing more than 
a manifestation of the same emotions which in other religious establishments 
differently constituted find expression in the worship of departed ancestors, 
of the saints, of the Virgin Mary, or of the Deity. As a result of this teach- 
ing, the Englishman's veneration for British royalty became almost as strong 
as that with which other men regard things holy, and was certainly more far- 
reaching in its effects. The compact between the Church Establishment and 
royalty was in the nature of a close partnership, with the terms and condi- 
tions clearly laid down and accepted on both sides. The kings have ever 
since relied chiefly upon their bishops to maintain the loyalty of the com- 
mon people to the crown, and to that end the bishops have heretofore 
effectively used that most powerful agency, religion. 

At the same time, the Church soon secured from the king a division of 
the power thus obtained and a goodly share of the material acquisitions re- 
sulting from its exercise. It has been necessary for both parties to the com- 
pact, as a matter of self-preservation, to prevent the intrusion of new elements 
into the field, and so long as it could possibly be done they were kept out. 
Early manifestations of spiritual religion, accordingly, were viewed with 
alarm and abhorrence by bishop and king alike, stigmatized as dissension by 
the one and sedition by the other, and repressed as treason by both. It is only 
during the present century, with the spread of knowledge among the masses, 
that the great body of the English people has learned that there is not ne- 
cessarily any more than a nominal kinship between the terms ' ' bishop ' ' and 
11 religion "; and that the consequent decadence of the Anglican Church has 


Early American Animosity to England 147 

resulted. The crimes of the founder of that Church, connived at and par- 
ticipated in by Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury, 3 have scarcely a parallel 
in any history but that of the Turk ; and to call Henry a reformer of religion 
is analogous to saying that the fear of the devil is the beginning of god- 
liness. The vain Elizabeth, likewise, committed so many heinous offences 
in the name of religion, that their aggregate evil would far outweigh the 
good of her reputed contribution to its reformation. 8 Therefore, when the 
Scottish nation of God-worshippers became associated with the English na- 
tion of king- worshippers, under James Stuart's rule, it is not surprising 
that the English " spiritual lords " should find nothing but error and trea- 
son in the teachings of the Scottish system of religion, a system which did 
not recognize the king as the supreme head and fountain of the Church. 

Under such an institution, then, as Henry founded, — not truly a spiritual 
church, but an offshoot of despotism, — the persecutions of the Presbyterians 
in Scotland followed the succession of James Stuart to the throne of Eliza- 
beth as a matter of course. Hence, it was to be expected that in Scotland 
should be fought and won the first battles that established the principle for 
which the Scottish martyrs died — that in matters of conscience the king was 
not supreme, 4 and that the State and Church were distinct and separate in- 
stitutions, and not to be joined together as one. 6 

In England and in English history it is customary to speak of Henry 
VIII.'s Roman Catholic daughter as " Bloody Mary " because she burned 
some scores of Protestants and one or two Episcopalian bishops. 8 Compared 
with many of the successors of those bishops, however, and with some of her 
own successors, Queen Mary was as red to black. Where she killed scores, 
they destroyed thousands; while she was a wronged, superstitious, sickly, and 
unbalanced woman, — a daughter of Spain and of Henry Tudor, — brooding 
over and avenging the barbarities inflicted upon herself, her mother, and 
her mother's Church, — they were set up as teachers, exemplars, and rivals 
of Christ and the prophets. 7 Her crimes were those of retaliation, ignorance, 
and superstition ; theirs were deep-planned, self-seeking, and malicious. The 
English Church Establishment, for its years, has fully as much to answer 
for that is evil as any like organization by which the name of religion has 
ever been disgraced. It is not surprising, therefore, that in all the history of 
the inception and progress of those movements which have given to Eng- 
land her boasted boon of British liberty and to the world at large the benef- 
icent results arising from the victories of the British conscience, we find 
their first chief opposer and vilifier in the Established Church. 8 

However, the murdering missionaries of this Establishment, turned loose 
in Scotland by the Stuarts in the seventeenth century, did not all pursue 
their bloody work of destruction unmolested. One of the chief agents of 
the persecution, Archbishop Sharp, met his death at the point of the 
sword, and died even as Cardinal Beaton had died in Scotland more than a 
century before, with no time for repentance, and no chance for an earthly 

148 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

benediction. Neither can their course be regarded as productive of results 
ultimately disastrous to the cause of humanity, however great the sufferings 
of their immediate victims; but rather, on the contrary, it proved to be the 
means of hastening the coming of some of mankind's greatest blessings. It 
was the inciting cause of the great revolution that began in Scotland in 1638, 
spread over England a few years later, and reached its culmination when the 
head of the Anglican Church's earthly god was cut off. Afterwards, it drove 
thousands of the Scottish Presbyterians into Ireland. Without the presence 
of these refugees in Ulster in 1689 the complete success of the revolution of 
that period would have been impossible. 

Yet, notwithstanding the fact that the Scots saved Ireland to William, and 
made it possible for him to succeed to the English crown, the measure of 
their cup of persecution was not yet filled; and for more than half a century 
afterwards the British Government, chiefly through the Episcopal Establish- 
ment, continued to run up a debt of hatred with these Scottish emigrants — 
a debt that accumulated rapidly during the first years of the eighteenth cen- 
tury, and the evidences of which were handed down from father to son and 
added to in each succeeding generation. After 1689, it received its first 
fresh increments in Ireland by the passage of certain Parliamentary acts, 
tending to the restriction and resulting in the destruction of the woollen 
industry; they being the final ones in a series of discriminating enactments 
which began at the Restoration in favor of the English manufacturers 
as against those of Ireland. 8 

This was followed in 1704 by the passage of the bill containing the Eng- 
lish Test Act. This act practically made outlaws of the Presbyterians in 
Ireland, and was one of the chief inciting causes of the emigration to 
America which increased with such rapidity during the first twenty years 
after its enactment. 10 

The next infliction to which the Ulster Scots were subjected was that of 
rack-renting landlordism, by which thousands of families were driven out of 
the country after 17 18. Rents were increased to two or three times their 
former amounts; and in addition to this extortion the Dissenters were still 
obliged to pay the blood-money exacted by the Established Church in the 
form of tithes. 11 

These galling and unjust discriminations continued with more or less 
modified severity during the whole period between the passage of the Test 
Act and the time of the final throwing off of the British yoke by those whom 
its operation had driven to America. 

It is said by most American historians that the War of Independence was 
not a suddenly conceived movement; that it resulted from repeated acts of 
injustice on the part of Great Britain toward the American colonies subse- 
quent to and resulting from the French and Indian wars of 1755 anc * I 1^3'y 
that the arbitrary action of the king's representatives in America began to be 
resented by some of the citizens fifteen years before the battle of Lexington; 

Early American Animosity to England 149 

that in Massachusetts the necessity for some measure of relief from 
ecclesiastical and governmental tyranny became apparent as early as 1761; 
and that the political agitation of the next decade and a half was what stirred 
the people up to a sufficiently adequate realization of the meaning of the 
oppressive measures inflicted upon New England by Great Britain, and 
made them ready to accept the issue when it was finally drawn, and to abide 
by its consequences when they became apparent. All this is very true, so 
far as it goes. It is also true that the concentration of the disciplinary 
measures upon the devoted patriots of Boston, and their being the first to 
suffer from those measures and the results following upon their attempted 
enforcement, may to a great extent account for the eagerness and intensity 
with which those people precipitated and entered upon the conflict. But 
these are only portions of the truth, and he who would read American his- 
tory aright must first take into account the aggregate value of the contribu- 
tions to America in men and measures of the Holland and Palatinate Dutch, 
the Huguenot French, and the Lowland and Ulster Scotch, decide just how 
much greater, if any, is America's eighteenth-century debt to England and 
the English than her obligation to non-English men and ideas of other coun- 
tries, and learn the whole truth — that to no one man or set of men, and to 
no one exclusive creed, community, race, nationality, or sectional division, 
is due the credit for those institutions and that liberty which came to be 
called American after the events of 1776. 

He is, indeed, a superficial student of American history and of human 
nature, who can see the workings of no other influences at that time than 
those which immediately led up to the conflict at Lexington. 12 

In New England, to be sure, there was no long-seated bitterness against 
the British Government. England was truly the mother country of that 
province. Their grievances were recent ; their wounds fresh. Great Britain 
in its restrictive measures against Boston Port touched their pockets as well 
as their persons, and like true Englishmen they were bound to fight against 
any encroachments upon their guaranteed rights of person or property. 

But in a great body of the people outside of New England the causes 
were deeper and of more ancient origin. Their enmity to England and the 
English government dated far back from the beginning of history. It was 
not unlike the feeling of the Roman Catholic Irish in America toward England 
at the present day. The Scots were the hereditary foes of the English kings. 
Their battles with the English had made of the Scottish Lowlands one vast 
armed camp and battle-field during the larger part of a period of five centuries 
after the year 1000. 18 Their forbears were " Scots who had wi' Wallace bled." 
They were children of the men who had fought the English at Stirling Bridge, 
at Bannockburn, and " on Flodden's dark field." Their fathers also had 
perished in countless numbers before the malignant fury of the Anglican 
Establishment. For worshipping God as their consciences dictated they 
had been hunted like wild beasts by the merciless dragoons of the bishops; 

150 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

pursued from moor to glen by armed bands of the king's soldiers, their chil- 
dren shot down like dogs by the ferocious ruffians employed by the English 
Church, or doomed to a fate worse than death by savage Highlanders, sure 
of a promised immunity, whom that Church had turned loose upon their 
defenceless homes. 

The Scotch were not of a cowardly race, nor were they weak and spirit- 
less louts, subject to their masters for life or death, like dumb, driven cattle. 
They cannot be judged by modern standards, but must be compared with 
people of other races who were their contemporaries. It is true they en- 
dured unjust persecutions and grievous oppressions for long periods without 
open complaint or effective resistance. But they rebelled against their 
tyrants and oppressors earlier, and more often, and more efficaciously than 
did the people of any other nation. They anticipated the English by a full 
century in their revolutions, and their claim for the rights of the individual. 
They were more than two centuries ahead of the French in fighting and 
dying for the principles of the French Revolution. They were farther ad- 
vanced three centuries ago than the Germans are to-day in their conceptions 
and ideals of individual liberty. Buckle well says, in speaking of his own 
English race, "If we compare our history with that of our northern neigh- 
bors, we must pronounce ourselves a meek and submissive people." There 
have been more rebellions in Scotland than in any other country, excepting 
some of the Central and South American republics. And the rebellions 
have been very sanguinary, as well as very numerous. The Scotch have 
made war upon most of their kings, and put to death many. To mention 
their treatment of a single dynasty, they murdered James I. and James III. 
They rebelled against James II. and James VII. They laid hold of James 
V. and placed him in confinement. Mary they immured in a castle, and 
afterwards deposed. Her successor, James VI., they imprisoned; they led 
him captive about the country, and on one occasion attempted his life. 
Towards Charles I. they showed the greatest animosity, and they were the 
first to restrain his mad career. Three years before the English ventured to 
rise against that despotic prince, the Scotch boldly took up arms and made 
war on him. The service which they then rendered to the cause of liberty 
it would be hard to overrate. They often lacked patriotic leaders at home, 
and their progress was long retarded by internecine and clan strife. They 
were hard-headed, fighting ploughmen. Though with a deep religious char- 
acter, and conscientiousness to an extreme that often has seemed ridiculous 
to outsiders, their material accomplishments as adventurers, pioneers, and 
traders, in statesmanship, in science, in metaphysics, in literature, in com- 
merce, in finance, in invention, and in war, show them to be the peers of the 
people of any other race the world has ever known. 

Hence, they entered upon the American Revolutionary contest with a 
deep-seated hatred of England inherited from the past, with a passionate 
desire for vengeance, and with that never-ceasing persistence which is their 

Early American Animosity to England 151 

chief characteristic as a race " ; and in tracing their history down to this point 
it would seem as if we could see the working of some inscrutable principle 
of Divine compensation ; for without the later presence in America of these 
descendants of the martyred Scottish Covenanters — doubly embittered by 
the remembrance of the outrageous wrongs done their fathers and the ex- 
perience of similar wrongs inflicted upon themselves and their families — the 
Revolution of 1776 would not have been undertaken, and could not have 
been accomplished. 16 


I See Appendix H (Henry VIII. 's Reformation and Church). 

8 Cranmer first suggested to Henry a means by which he might free himself from Catherine 
without waiting for a papal divorce ; namely, that if he could obtain opinions from the learned 
of the universities of Europe to the effect that his marriage was illegal because of Catherine's 
having been his deceased brother's wife, then no divorce would be necessary. Just how these 
opinions were obtained is told in letters of Richard Croke and others in Nos. xcix., cxxvi., 
cxxviii., cxlvi., clvii., and cciii., of Pocock's Records of the Reformation ; and also by a 
contemporary of Cranmer (Cavendish, Life of Wolsey, Singer's edition, p. 206) in these 
words : " There was inestimable sums of money given to the famous clerks to choke them, and 
in especial to those who had a governance and custody of their universities' seals." Later, 
Cranmer pronounced the divorce between Catherine and Henry, when it became apparent 
that the Pope would not consent to it ; and he likewise arbitrarily divorced Anne and Henry, 
and declared the children of both consorts of that king to be bastards. When finally brought 
to punishment by Mary for the many injuries done to her mother, herself, and her church, 
and for his share in the execution of the Catholics, he basely recanted his Protestantism in the 
vain hope of saving his life. 

" The courage that Cranmer had shown since the accession of Mary gave way the 
moment his final doom was announced. The moral cowardice with the lust and despotism 
of Henry displayed itself again in six successive recantations by which he hoped to purchase 
pardon." — Green, History of the English People, book vi. , ch. ii. 

3 * ' Upon the approach of the Armada many of the Catholics had been placed in prison as 
a precautionary measure. Even this hardship did not turn them against the government. 
Those confined in Ely for their religion signed a declaration of their ' 4 readiness to fight till 
death, in the cause of the queen, against all her enemies, were they kings, or priests, or 
popes, or any other potentate whatsoever." Before 1581, three Catholics had been executed 
for their religion, and after the landing of Campian and Parsons, a few Jesuits were added to 
the number. Now, directly after the destruction of the Armada, which proved how little 
danger there was from Rome, a selection of victims was made from the Catholics in prison, 
as if to do honor to the victory. 

II Six priests were taken, whose only alleged crime was the exercise of their priestly office ; 
four laymen who had been reconciled to Mother Church, and four others who had aided or 
harbored priests. They were all tried, convicted, and sentenced to immediate execution. 
Within three months, fifteen more of their companions were dealt with in the same manner, 
six new gallows being erected for their execution. It was not so much as whispered that 
they had been guilty of any act of disloyalty. Upon their trials nothing was charged against 
them except the practice of their religion. This was called treason, and they met the bar- 
barous death of traitors, being cut down from the gallows while alive, and disembowelled 
when in the full possession of their senses. But this was only the beginning of the bloody 
work. In the fourteen years which elapsed between the attempted invasion by Spain and the 
death of Elizabeth, sixty-one Catholic clergymen (few of whom were Jesuits), forty-seven 

152 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

laymen, and two gentlewomen suffered capital punishment for some one or other of the 
spiritual felonies and treasons which had been lately created, most of the victims being drawn 
and quartered. 

" Many writers, when alluding to this butchery, make the statement that it was not a relig- 
ious persecution ; that these victims were punished for treason and not for their religion. But 
when a statute, in defiance of all principles of law, makes the mere practice of a religious rite 
punishable as an act of treason, it is the paltriest verbal quibble to say that it is not a re- 
ligious persecution. Under such a definition, all of Alva's atrocities in the Netherlands 
could be justified, and the Inquisition would take the modest place of a legitimate engine of 
the State." — Douglas Campbell, The Puritan in Holland, England, and America, vol. ii., 
pp. 110-112 (by permission of Messrs. Harper & Brothers). 

In the elections for the New Parliament [1661] the zeal for church and king swept 
all hope of moderation and compromise before it. . . . The new members were yet 
better Churchmen than loyalists. ... At the opening of their session they ordered every 
member to receive the communion, and the League and Covenant to be solemnly burned by 
the common hangman in Westminster Hall. The bishops were restored to their seats in the 
House of Lords. The conference at the Savoy between the Episcopalians and Presbyterians 

broke up in anger The strongholds of this party were the corporations of the 

boroughs ; and an attempt was made to drive them from these by the Test and Corporation 
Act, which required a reception of the communion according to the rites of the Anglican 
Church, a renunciation of the League and Covenant, and a declaration that it was unlawful 
on any grounds to take up arms against the King, before admission to municipal offices. A 
more deadly blow was dealt at the Puritans in the renewal of the Uniformity Act. Not only 
was the use of the Prayer-book and the Prayer-book only, enforced in all public worship, but 
an unfeigned consent and assent was demanded from every minister of the Church to all 
which was contained in it ; while for the first time since the Reformation, all orders save 
those conferred by the hands of bishops were legally dissolved. ... It was the close of 
an effort which had been going on ever since Elizabeth's accession to bring the English com- 
munion into closer relations with the reformed communions of the Continent, and into greater 
harmony with the religious instincts of the nation at large. The Church of England stood 
from that moment isolated and alone among all the churches of the Christian world. The 
Reformation had separated it irretrievably from those which still clung to obedience of the 
Papacy. By its rejection of all but Episcopal orders, the Act of Uniformity severed it as 
irretrievably from the general body of Protestant churches, whether Lutheran or Reformed. 
And while thus cut off from all healthy religious communication with the world without, it 
sank into immorality within. With the expulsion of the Puritan clergy, all change, all 
efforts after reform, all national development, suddenly stopped. From that time to this, the 
Episcopal Church has been unable to meet the varying spiritual needs of its adherents by any 
modification of its government or Its worship. It stands alone among all the religious bodies 
of Western Christendom in its failure through two hundred years to devise a single new 
service of prayer or of praise. — Green's Short History, pp. 606, 607. 

4 See Appendix I (Scotland vs. The Divine Right of Kings). 

5 This is said to be the one original principle contributed by America to the science of 
government, but whether that be true or not, it came wholly and solely from that part of the 
American people whose forefathers had died for it in Scotland. The doctrine of the respon- 
sibility of kings to their subjects, as widely disseminated through America by Thomas Paine 
in his Common Sense in 1774, an d by Jefferson afterwards made a chief corner-stone of the 
Declaration, is likewise of Scottish rather than English origin. See Appendix F. (Separa- 
tion of Church and State.) 

6 The executions of Protestants which took place in "Bloody Mary's" reign were, in 
1555, seventy-five ; in 1556, eighty-three ; in 1557, seventy-seven ; in 1558, fifty-one ; a total 
of 286. 

Early American Animosity to England 153 

7 The religious changes had thrown an almost sacred character over the " majesty" of 
the King. Henry was the Head of the Church. From the primate to the meanest deacon 
every minister of it derived from him his sole right to exercise spiritual powers. The voice 
of its preachers was the echo of his will. He alone could define orthodoxy or declare heresy. 
The forms of its worship and beliefs were changed and rechanged at the royal caprice. Half 
of its wealth went to swell the royal treasury, and the other half lay at the King's mercy. It 
was this unprecedented concentration of all power in the hands of a single man that over- 
awed the imagination of Henry's subjects. He was regarded as something high above the 
laws which govern common men. The voices of statesmen and priests extolled his wisdom 
and authority as more than human. The Parliament itself rose and bowed to the vacant 
throne when his name was mentioned. An absolute devotion to his person replaced the old 
loyalty to the law. When the Primate of the English Church described the chief merit of 
Cromwell, it was by asserting that he loved the King " no less than he loved God." — John 
Richard Green, History of the English People, book vi., ch. i. 

8 This was particularly true at the time of the Revolutions of 1638, 1688, and 1775. 

9 See Appendix J (Repression of Trade in Ireland). 

10 No Presbyterian could henceforth hold any office in the army or navy, in the customs, 
excise, or post office, nor in any of the courts of law, in Dublin or the provinces. They were 
forbidden to be married by their own ministers ; they were prosecuted in the ecclesiastical 
courts for immorality because they had so married. The bishops introduced clauses into their 
leases forbidding the erection of meeting-houses on any part of their estates and induced 
many landlords to follow their example. To crown all, the Schism Act was passed in 17 14, 
which would have swept the Presbyterian Church out of existence, but Queen Anne died be- 
fore it came into operation, but not before the furious zeal of Swift had nailed up the doors 
and windows of the Presbyterian meeting-house at Summer Hill, in the neighborhood of 
Laracor. Similar scenes occurred at three other places. The immediate effect of these 
proceedings was to estrange the Presbyterian people ; and, soon after, when they saw that all 
careers were closed against them, wearied out with long exactions, they began to leave the 
country by thousands. The destruction of the woollen trade sent 20,000 of them away. The 
rapacity and greed of landlords, and especially the Marquis of Donegal, the grandson of Sir 
Arthur Chichester, the founder of the Ulster plantation, caused the stream of emigration to 
America to flow on for nearly forty years without intermission. — Thomas Croskery, Irish 
Presbyierianism, Dublin, 1S84, pp. 13, 14. 

See Appendix K (The Test Act). 

11 " It would be difficult indeed to conceive a national condition less favourable than that 
of Ireland [in 171 7] to a man of energy and ambition. . . . If he were a Presbyterian he was 
subject to the disabilities of the Test Act. . . . The result was that a steady tide of emi- 
gration set in, carrying away all those classes who were most essential to the development of 
the nation. The manufacturers and the large class of energetic labourers who lived upon 
manufacturing industry were scattered far and wide. Some of them passed to England and 
Scotland. Great numbers found a home in Virginia and Pennsylvania, and they were the 
founders of the linen manufacture in New England {Burke's Settlements in America, ii., 174, 
175, 216). 

4 ' The Protestant emigration which began with the destruction of the woollen manufacture, 
continued during many years with unabated and even accelerating rapidity. At the time of 
the Revolution, when great portions of the country lay waste, and when the whole framework 
of society was shattered, much Irish land had been let on lease at very low rents to Eng- 
lish, and especially to Scotch, Protestants. About I7i7and 1718 these leases began to fall in. 
Rents were usually doubled, and often trebled. The smaller farms were generally put up to 
competition, and the Catholics, who were accustomed to live in the most squalid misery, and 
to forego all the comforts of life, very naturally outbid the Protestants. This fact, added to 
the total destruction of the main industries on which the Protestant population subsisted, to 

154 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

the disabilities to which the Protestant nonconformists were subject on account of their 
religion, and to the growing tendency to throw land into pasture, produced a great social 
revolution, the effects of which have never been repaired." — Lecky, Irelandin the Eighteenth 
Century, vol. i., pp. 245, 246. 

Mr. Robert Slade, Secretary to the Irish Society of London in 1802, who had been sent 
to Londonderry to inspect the property of that Society, in the report of his journey writes as 
follows : " The road from Down Hill to Coleraine goes through the best part of the Cloth- 
workers' proportion, and was held by the Right Hon. Richard Jackson [he was nominated 
for Parliament by the town of Coleraine in 1712], who was the Society's general agent. It is 
commonly reported in the country, that, having been obliged to raise the rents of his tenants 
very considerably, in consequence of the large fine he paid, it produced an almost total emi- 
gration of them to America, and that they formed a principal part of that undisciplined body 
which brought about the surrender of the British army at Saratoga." This undoubtedly 
refers to the emigration of those colonists who, in 1718-19, founded the town of Londonderry, 
New Hampshire, from which place were recruited Stark's Rangers, who fought the battle of 
Bennington, and also many of those who took part in the battles which led to Burgoyne's 
surrender. Five ship-loads, comprising about one hundred and twenty families, sailed from 
Ulster in the summer of 1718 , reaching Boston on August 4th. Here they were not long per- 
mitted to remain by the Puritan Government, owing to the fact that they had come from 
Ireland, but were granted a portion of the township in which they afterwards built the town 
of Londonderry, the site then being far out on the frontier. These emigrants were accom- 
panied by four ministers, among whom was the Reverend James Macgregor. He had been 
ordained at Aghadoey in 1701, and served as their first minister in America. Their motives 
in emigrating may be gathered from a manuscript sermon of Mr. Macgregor's, addressed to 
them on the eve of their embarkation. These reasons he states as follows : " 1. To avoid 
oppression and cruel bondage. 2. To shun persecution and designed ruin. 3. To withdraw 
from the communion of idolators. 4. To have an opportunity of worshipping God according 
to the dictates of conscience and the rules of His inspired Word." 

See also Appendix L (Tithes in Ulster). 

12 Mr. Adolphus, in his book on the Reign of George III., uses the following language : 
' ' The first effort toward a union of interest was made by the Presbyterians, who were eager 
in carrying into execution their favorite project of forming a synod. Their churches had 
hitherto remained unconnected with each other, and their union in synod had been considered 
so dangerous to the community that in 1725 it was prevented by the express interference of 
the lords-justices. Availing themselves, with great address, of the rising discontents, the 
convention of ministers and elders at Philadelphia enclosed in a circular-letter to all the 
Presbyterian congregations in Pennsylvania the proposed articles of union. ... In con- 
sequence of this letter, a union of all the congregations took place in Pennsylvania and the 
Lower Counties. A similar confederacy was established in all the Southern provinces, in 
pursuance of similar letters written by their respective conventions. These measures ended 
in the establishment of an annual synod at Philadelphia, where all general affairs, political as 
well as religious, were debated and decided. From this synod orders and decrees were issued 
throughout America, and to them a ready and implicit obedience was paid. 

" The discontented in New England recommended a union of the Congregational and 
Presbyterian interests throughout the colonies. A negotiation took place, which ended in 
the appointment of a permanent committee of correspondence, and powers to communicate 
and consult on all occasions with a similar committee established by the Congregational 
churches in New England. . . 

4 ' By this union a party was prepared to display their power by resistance, and the Stamp 
law presented itself as a favorable object of hostility." 

Equally explicit testimony is borne in a published address of Mr. William B. Reed of 
Philadelphia, himself an Episcopalian : " The part taken by the Presbyterians in the contest 

Early American Animosity to England 155 

with the mother-country was indeed, at the time, often made a ground of reproach, and the 
connection between their efforts for the security of their religious liberty and opposition to 
the oppressive measures of Parliament, was then distinctly seen." Mr. Galloway, a prominent 
advocate of the government, in 1774, ascribed the revolt and revolution mainly to the action 
of the Presbyterian clergy and laity as early as 1764. Another writer of the same period says : 
' ' You will have discovered that I am no friend to the Presbyterians, and that I fix all the 
blame of these extraordinary proceedings upon them." — J. G. Craighead, Scotch and Irish 
Seeds in American Soil, pp. 322-324. 

13 The two nations in the long course of their history had met each other in three hun- 
dred and fourteen pitched battles, and had sacrificed more than a million of men as brave as 
ever wielded claymore, sword, or battle-axe. — Halsey, Scotland's Influence on Civilization, 
p. 14. 

14 " Call this war, my dearest friend, by whatsoever name you may, only call it not an 
American Rebellion, it is nothing more nor less than an Irish-Scotch Presbyterian Rebellion." 
— Extract from a letter of Captain Johann Heinrichs of the Hessian Jager Corps, written 
from Philadelphia, January 18, 1778 ; see Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, 
vol. xxii., p. 137. 

General Wayne had a constitutional attachment to the decision of the sword, and this 
cast of character had acquired strength from indulgence, as well as from the native temper of the 
troops he commanded. They were known by the designation of the Line of Pennsylvania ; 
whereas they might have been with more propriety called the Line of Ireland. Bold and 
daring, they were impatient and refractory ; and would always prefer an appeal to the bayonet 
to a toilsome march. Restless under the want of food and whiskey, adverse to absence from 
their baggage, and attached to the pleasures of the table, Wayne and his brigade were more 
encumbered with wagons than any equal portion of the army. The General and his soldiers 
were singularly fitted for close and stubborn action, hand to hand, in the centre of the army ; 
but very little adapted to the prompt and toilsome service to which Lafayette was and must 
be exposed, so long as the British general continued to press him. Cornwallis therefore did not 
miscalculate when he presumed that the junction of Wayne would increase rather than 
diminish his chance of bringing his antagonist [Lafayette] to action. — Gen. Henry Lee, 
Memoirs of the War in the Southern Department, ch. xxxi., p. 203, vol. ii., first edition ; p. 
292, second edition. 

Dr. Charles Janeway Stille, in his work on Major-General Anthony Wayne and the 
Pennsylvania Line in the Continental Army, in commenting on this passage speaks as follows : 
"A curious error has been fallen into by many historians, including Mr. Bancroft, in speaking 
of the Pennsylvania Line, that ' it was composed in a large degree of new-comers from Ireland.' 
. . . These writers are evidently thinking of the characteristic qualities of the Celtic Irish- 
man in war ; but there were not, it is said on good authority [*'. e., Dr. William H. Egle and 
John Blair Linn, editors of the Pennsylvania Archives'], more than three hundred persons of 
Irish birth (Roman Catholic and Celtic) in the Pennsylvania Line. Two-thirds of the force 
were Scotch-Irish, a race with whose fighting qualities we are all familiar, but which are quite 
opposite to those which characterize the true Irish Celt. Most of them were descendants of the 
Scotch-Irish emigrants of 1717-1730, and very few of them were ' new-comers.' " In making 
the statement last quoted, Dr. Stille evidently overlooked the large emigration of Scotch-Irish 
from Belfast to Pennsylvania which took place in 1772-73. These emigrants left Ulster 
with a bitter animosity to England, brought on in a large measure by the same causes which 
afterwards led to the Protestant Irish Rebellion of 1798. 

15 See Appendix M (The Scotch-Irish and the Revolution). 




THE North of Ireland is divided into the counties of Antrim, Down, Ar- 
magh, Londonderry (formerly Coleraine), Tyrone, Monaghan, Donegal, 
Fermanagh, and Cavan. These nine counties comprise the ancient province 
of Ulster, which includes a fourth part of the island, and contains 8567 
square miles of territory, an area equal to nearly one-fifth that of Pennsyl- 
vania, or of about the same extent as the portion of that State lying south 
and east of the Blue Ridge Mountains. 

At the present time, one-third of the land in Ulster is under cultivation ; 
somewhat more than a third is in pasturage ; and a little less than one-fourth 
is classed as waste land — mountains and bogs : in all 5,321,580 acres. Such 
of this land as was not laid off into towns and roads was held, in 1881, by 
22,000 owners — 3,766,816 acres, or 72 per cent., belonging to 477 individuals, 
of whom 95 owned 2,088,170 acres, or 40 per cent, of the whole. 

In 1891, the population of the province was 1,619,814, of whom 45.98 per 
cent, are classified in the Census Report of Great Britain as Roman Catho- 
lics ; 22.39 P er cent, as Episcopalians ; and 26.32 per cent, as Presbyterians. 
These proportions bear a close affinity to those of the various racial elements 
of which the population is composed. In this respect, the Roman Catholic 
Church represents approximately the ancient Irish element; the Episcopalian 
Church, the English or Anglo-Irish ; and the Presbyterian, the Scotch or 
Scotch-Irish. In those districts where one element predominates over an- 
other, we find a majority of the people identified, to a greater or less extent, 
with the corresponding religious sect. This has been the case for nearly 
three hundred years, or ever since the foreign elements were first introduced, 
and is so generally recognized that it is perhaps not too much to say that in 
no other mixed population in the world has church affiliation been so char- 
acteristic of race and nationality as in the North of Ireland since the be- 
ginning of the seventeenth century. 1 This circumstance being kept in 
mind, does much to simplify the work of tracing the various elements of the 
population to their original sources. 

The Presbyterian Church of Ireland now numbers over 550 congrega- 
tions, and there are, besides, several United Presbyterian and Reformed Pres- 
byterian congregations. The Presbyterians number nearly half a million — 
about one-tenth of the population of the country. The Episcopalian Church 
claims over 600,000 adherents. The Presbyterian Church doubtless includes 
more than four-fifths of the Scots of Ulster. The manner in which the mem- 
bership of that church is distributed affords ample proof of this. Ulster 
claims fifteen-sixteenths of them, and they are found in those identical 


160 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

localities where we know that the Scots settled. In Antrim they constitute 
38 per cent, of a total population of 428,000 ; in Down, 38 per cent, of a 
total population of 267,000 ; while in Londonderry they form 30 per cent., 
in Tyrone, 19, and in Armagh 15 per cent, of the population. But it is when 
we come to examine the details of the census of 1881 that the clearest traces 
of the Scottish emigration are to be found. Down has only 38 per cent, of 
Presbyterians, but that is because the south of the county was never colon- 
ized, and is still Roman Catholic. The old Scottish colony in Upper Clan- 
naboye and the Great Ards is still nearly as Presbyterian as in 1630. James 
Hamilton, immediately after settling there in 1606, raised churches and 
placed " learned and pious ministers from Scotland " in the six parishes of 
his, estate — Bangor, Killinchy, Holywood, Ballyhalbert, Dundonald, and 
Killyleagh. These parishes have gone on flourishing, so that when the census 
collector did his rounds through Hamilton's old estate in 1881, he found 
that it contained 29,678 inhabitants ; and that although it was situated in 
what has been called the most Catholic country in Europe, only 3444 Roman 
Catholics were there to be found, as against 17,205 Presbyterians. For 
nearly three centuries these " Westlan' Whigs " have stood true to their Scot- 
tish Church. The record of Hugh Montgomery's settlement is quite as 
curious. His old headquarters, Newtown-Ards, has grown into a flourish- 
ing little manufacturing town ; and Donaghadee is a big village well known 
as a ferry-port for Scotland. Still they remain " true blue " Presbyterian. 
Montgomery's estate is pretty well covered by the four parishes of Newtown- 
Ards, Grey Abbey, Comber, and Donaghadee. These have a united population 
of 26,559 ; the Presbyterians number 16,714, and the Roman Catholics only 
1370 — the balance being mainly Episcopalians and Methodists. In Armagh 
and in Fermanagh, on the other hand, the Episcopalians are more numerous 
than the Presbyterians. In the former there are 32 per cent, belonging to 
the Church of Ireland, and only 15 to the Presbyterian Church ; while in 
the latter there are only 2 per cent, of Presbyterians, as against 36 of Epis- 
copalians. The balance of nationalities and of religions remains to all 
appearance what the colonization of the seventeenth century made it, and 
that notwithstanding the great emigration from Ulster during the eighteenth 
century. The only strange change is, that Belfast, which was at its founda- 
tion an English town, should so soon have become in the main Scottish, and 
should remain such unto this day. 

There is another point that may be mentioned in this connection — one, 
indeed, on which the foregoing conditions may be said quite largely to 
depend. That is, the fact that intermarriages between the natives and the 
Scotch settlers of the seventeenth century, and their descendants in Ulster, 
have been so rare and uncommon as to be practically anomalous, and in 
consequence can hardly be said to enter into the general question of race 
origin ; or at most, only in an incidental way. 2 

It is true, this cannot be said of the English colonists of Elizabeth's time, 

Who Are the Scotch-Irish ? 161 

nor of Cromwell's soldiers, who settled in the southern provinces of Ireland 
after 1650. Concerning these two latter classes of settlers, as the most 
recent authoritative writer 8 on Ireland has said: " No feature of Irish 
history is more conspicuous than the rapidity with which intermarriages had 
altered the character of successive generations of English colonists. . . . 
The conquest of Ireland by the Puritan soldiers of Cromwell was hardly 
more signal than the conquest of these soldiers by the invincible Catholicism 
of the Irish women." But in the case of the Scotch colonists planted by 
James in Ulster, and of those who followed them, we find none of the results 
attributed by Lecky to the intermarriages of the English soldiers with the 
Irish. And while it is true that the influence of religion in keeping up 
the lines of race distinction has been at times overestimated, yet in the case 
of the Ulster Scots, it cannot be maintained that propinquity and the asso- 
ciations of daily life made it " absolutely certain that attachments would be 
formed, that connections would spring up, that passion, caprice, and daily 
association would . . . prove too strong for religious or social repug- 
nance " to an extent sufficient to change or perceptibly influence the char- 
acter of their descendants. These Scottish people in Ireland to-day exhibit 
all the distinctive racial characteristics of their Scottish forefathers ; and 
have none of the peculiar qualities attributed by the two leading writers on 
the subject to the offspring of mixed marriages between Irish Protestants 
and Roman Catholics. Thus we are led to conclude that inasmuch as the 
Ulster Scots have not been overcome by the invincible Roman Catholi- 
cism of the Irish women, and since they remain Presbyterians, as their early- 
Scotch ancestors were before them, they are likewise of unmixed Scottish 

Concerning the correctness of this conclusion, we have the recent testi- 
mony of two distinguished Americans, one of them a native and the other 
for many years a resident of Ulster. And, considering the well-known 
prominence of these two gentlemen as clergymen, it cannot be supposed 
that their denominational proclivities would lead them to give any other 
than an accurate statement of facts so readily capable of verification. One 
of these witnesses, the late Dr. John Hall of New York, said : " I have 
sometimes noticed a little confusion of mind in relation to the phrase, 
* Scotch-Irish,' as if it meant that Scotch people had come over and in- 
termarried with the native Irish, and that thus a combination of two races, 
two places, two nationalities had taken place. That is by no means the 
state of the case. On the contrary, with kindly good feeling in various 
directions, the Scotch people kept to the Scotch people, and they are called 
Scotch-Irish from purely local, geographical reasons, and not from any 
union of the kind that I have alluded to. I have n't the least doubt that 
their being in Ireland and in close contact with the native people of that 
land, and their circumstances there, had some influence in the developing of 
the character, in the broadening of the sympathies, in the extending of the 

1 62 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

range of thought and action of the Scotch-Irish people ; but they are Scotch 
through and through, they are Scottish out and out, and they are Irish be- 
cause, in the providence of God, they were sent for some generations to the 
land that I am permitted to speak of as the land of my birth." 

The second authority is the Rev. John S. Macintosh of Philadelphia, who, 
by reason of his many years of close observation spent amongst the people 
of Ulster, and his extended research into their earlier history, is perhaps 
better qualified to speak conclusively on the subject than any other living 
person. His testimony is that : " Our American term — the Scotch-Irish — 
is not known even in Ulster, save among the very few who have learned the 
ways of our common speech. The term known in Britain is the Ulsterman ; 
and in Ireland, it is the ' sturdy Northern,' or at times the ' black Northern.' 
What changed the Lowlander, and what gave us the Ulsterman ? In this 
study I have drawn very largely upon the labors of two friends of former 
years — Dr. William D. Killen of the Assembly's College, one of the most 
learned and accurate of historians, and the Rev. George Hill, once Librarian 
of Queen's College, Belfast, Ireland, than whom never was there more 
ardent student of old annals and reliable of antiquarians. But more largely 
still have I drawn on my own personal watch and study of this Ulster folk 
in their homes, their markets, and their churches. From Derry to Down I 
have lived with them. Every town, village, and hamlet from the Causeway 
to Carlingford is familiar to me. Knowing the Lowlander and the Scotch- 
Irish of this land, I have studied the Ulsterman and his story of rights and 
wrongs, and that eagerly, for years. I speak that which I have seen, and 
testify what I have heard from their lips, read from old family books, church 
records, and many a tombstone in kirk-yards. . . . 

" This fact, that the Ulster colonist was a stranger, and the favorite, for 
the time, of England and her government, wrought in a twofold way ; in 
the Ulsterman and against him. . . . 

" Again, the fact that he was the royal colonist wrought in him the pride, 
the contempt, the hauteur and swaggering daring of a victorious race planted 
among despised savages. What at a later day was seen here may be seen 
down all the stretch of Ulster history. I have myself seen it, and heard 
time and again he would ' lord it ower the mere Eerish.' And the rulers of 
that hour both cultivated that feeling and enforced it. The Celt of that day 
had nothing to make him winsome or worthy of imitation. Romance and 
sentiment may as well be dropped. We have the hard facts about the clans- 
men of the O'Neill. The glory and the honor were with England. The 
times were big with the fresh British life. The men and women of that age 
and the age just closed are mighty by their witching force of greatness in 
good and evil. It is the era of Britain's bursting life and greatening soul. 
Song and statesmanship, the chiefs of the drama, and the captains of daring 
are telling mightily on our forefathers in England and in Ulster. The new 
' Plantation ' itself is full of enchantment when contrasted with the old state 

Who Are the Scotch-Irish ? 163 

of internecine war. . . . But those proud and haughty strangers, with high 
heads and their new ways, were hated as aliens and harried from the begin- 
ning by ' the wild Irish.' 

" The scorn of the Scot was met by the curse of the Celt. The native 
chiefs and their clansmen did not distinguish between the government and 
the colonists ; nor had they the right ; nor did the colonists give them any 
cause. The hate and the harrying of the Irish were returned, and with com- 
pound interest, by the proud Ulsterman. I neither approve nor apologize : 
I simply state what I find. To him the * redshanks ' of the ' wild Earl ' of 
Tyrone were exactly as the redskins of our forests to the men of New Eng- 
land and the Susquehanna and the Ohio. The natives were always * thae 
Eerish ! ' and the scorn is as sharp to-day on the tongue of a Belfast Orange- 
man as two centuries ago. It has been said that the Ulster settlers mingled 
and married with the Irish Celt. The Ulsterman did not mingle with the 
Celt. I speak, remember, chiefly of the period running from 1605 to 1741. 
There had been in Ireland before the ' Plantation ' some wild Islanders from 
the west of Scotland, whose descendants I have found in the Antrim 
* Glynnes ' ; they did marry and intermarry with the natives ; but King 
James expressly forbade anymore of these island-men being taken to Ulster; 
and he and his government took measures that the later settlers of the * Plan- 
tation ' should be taken ' from the inward parts of Scotland,' and that they 
should be so settled that they ' may not mix nor intermarry ' with * the 
mere Irish.' The Ulster settlers mingled freely with the English Puritans 
and with the refugee Huguenots ; but so far as my search of state papers, 
old manuscripts, examination of old parish registers, and years of personal 
talk with and study of Ulster folk disclose — the Scots did not mingle to any 
appreciable extent with the natives. I have talked with three very old friends, 
an educated lady, a shrewd farmer's wife, and a distinguished physician ; they 
could each clearly recall their great-grandfathers ; these great-grandparerits 
told them their fathers' tales ; and I have kept them carefully as valuable 
personal memoirs. These stories agree exactly with all we can get in docu- 
ments. With all its dark sides, as well as all light sides, the fact remains 
that Ulsterman and Celt were aliens and foes. 

" Hence came constant and bitter strife. ... In both Lowlander 
and Ulsterman is the same strong racial pride, the same hauteur and self- 
assertion, the same self-reliance, the same close mouth, and the same firm 
Will — ' the stiff heart for the steek brae.' They are both of the very Scotch, 
Scotch. To this very hour, in the remoter and more unchanged parts of 
Antrim and Down, the country-folks will tell you : ' We 're no Eerish bot 
Scoatch.' All their folk-lore, all their tales, their traditions, their songs, their 
poetry, their heroes and heroines, and their home-speech, is of the oldest 
Lowland types and times." 

Again, we have some supplementary evidence to the same effect from a 
recent Scottish author, John Harrison, who, in his account of the native 

164 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

Irish-Scots, gives a brief and characteristic description of an Ulster grave- 
yard. This author says : 

Two miles south from Donaghadee, on the shore road into the Upper 
Ards, that narrow peninsula between Strangford Lough and the Irish Sea, 
there lies a little enclosure which must arrest the stranger's attention. It is 
a graveyard, and is called Temple-patrick. It is surrounded by low stone 
walls ; no church or temple is now within its confines ; no trees or flowers 
give grateful shade, or lend colour and tender interest ; it is thickly covered 
with green mounds, and with monumental slabs of gray slaty stone, — the 
graves are packed close together. Read the simple ' headstones," and you 
discover no trace of sentiment ; few fond and loving words ; no request for 
the prayers, of the passer-by for the souls of those who sleep below ; nothing 
more akin to sentiment than " Sacred to the memory of." Above, great 
masses of gray clouds, as they go scudding past, throw down on the traveller, 
as he rests and thinks, big drops of rain ; and before him is spread out, 
north, south, and east, the sullen sea, whose moan fills all his sense of hear- 
ing. It is not the spot which a man would love to picture to himself as his 
last resting-place. Read the names on the stones, and you discover why 
here in Ireland there is to be found nothing of tender grace to mark the 
higher side, nothing of tinsel to show the lower, of Irish character. The 
names are very Scottish — such as Andrew Byers, John Shaw, Thomas 
MacMillan, Robert Angus ; it is a burying-place of the simple peasants of 
County Down, who are still, in the end of the nineteenth century, as Scot- 
tish as they were when they landed here nearly three centuries ago. . . . 

It is difficult to bring home to men who do not know Ireland and its his- 
tory, the fact that there is a deep, strongly marked difference between the 
Ulstermen and the Irish, and that that difference is not accidental, not the 
divergence arising out of different surroundings, not even that springing 
from antagonistic religious training, but is the deeper, stronger-marked 
cleavage of differing race. It is as distinct as that between any two varie- 
ties of any other animal — say between mastiff and stag-hound. Of course, 
intermarriage gradually shades off the difference of type ; but take the Scots 
of the Ards of Down, who have probably scarcely intermarried with the 
Irish during the three hundred years they have been in the island, and con- 
trast them with the inhabitants of West Donegal, who have probably scarcely 
mixed their blood with the English, and you see the race difference. It is 
strange for any man who is accustomed to walk through the southern dis- 
tricts of Scotland, and to meet the country people going about their daily 
work in their everyday clothes and everyday manner, to cross into Ireland 
and wander through the country roads of Down or Antrim. He is in a 
country which is supposed to be passionately anxious to set up a separate 
nationality, and yet he cannot feel as if he were away from his own kith and 
kin. The men who are driving the carts are like the men at home ; the 
women at the cottage doors are in build and carriage like the mothers of 
the southern Highlands ; the signs of the little shops in the village bear 
well-known names — Paterson, perhaps, or Johnstone, or ; the boy 
sitting on the " dyke " with nothing to do is whistling A man 's a man for 
a' that." He goes into a village inn, and is served by a six-foot, loosely- 
hung Scottish Borderer, worthy to have served " drams " to " the Shepherd 
and Christopher North " ; and when he leaves the little inn he sees by the 
sign that his host bears the name of "James Hay," and his wonder ceases. 

Who Are the Scotch-Irish ? 165 

The want of strangeness in the men and women is what strikes him as 
so strange. Then he crosses the Bann, and gets into a different region. 
He leaves behind him the pleasant green hills which shut in Belfast Lough, 
the great sweep of rich plain which Lough Neagh may well ask to show 
cause why it should not be annexed to its inland sea ; he gets within sight 
of the South Derry hills, and the actors in the scene partly change. Some 
are very familiar ; the smart maid at his inn is very like the housemaid at 
home, and the principal grocer of the little village is the " very image " of 
the elder who taught him at the Sunday School ; but he meets a donkey- 
cart, and neither the donkey nor its driver seem somehow or other to be kin 
to him ; and the "Father" passes him, and looks at him as at a stranger 
who is visiting his town, — then the Scotsman knows that he is out of Scot- 
land and into Ireland. It is not in Belfast that he feels the likeness to home 
so much, for everybody is walking fast just as they are in Glasgow, so he 
cannot notice them particularly, and, of course, the " loafers " at the public- 
house doors, who are certainly not moving smartly, do not count for any- 
thing in either town ; but it is in the country districts — at Newtown Ards, or 
Antrim, where life is leisurely, that he recognizes that he is among his own 
people ; while it is in a town which is in the border-land between Scot- 
tish and Irish, say at Coleraine, on a Saturday market-day, that he has the 
difference of the two types in face and figure brought strongly before him. 
Some seem foreign to him, others remind him of his " ain countrie," and 
make him feel that the district he is in, is in reality the land of the Scot. 

A contributor to the Edinburgh Review for April, 1869, in writing on this 
subject, says : 

Another effect of the Plantation [of Ulster] was that it effectually 
separated the two races, and kept them apart. It planted a new race in 
the country, which never coalesced with the native population. There they 
have been in continual contact for more than two centuries ; and they are 
still as distinct as though an ocean rolled between them. We have seen 
that all former schemes of plantation failed, because the new settlers became 
rapidly assimilated to the character, manners, and faith of the native inhab- 
itants ; even the descendants of Oliver's Puritan troopers being as effectually 
absorbed in the space of forty years as to be undistinguishable from the 
Celtic mass. The Ulster settlement put an end to the amalgamation of 
races ; difference of creed, difference of habits, difference of tradition, the 
sundering effects of the penal laws, kept them apart. The Presbyterian 
settlers preserved their religious distinctness by coming in families, and the 
intense hatred of Popery that has always marked the Scottish mind was 
an effective hindrance to intermarriage. It is a curious fact, that the tra- 
ditions of the Ulster Presbyterians still look back to Scotland as their home, 
and disclaim all alliance with the Celtic part of Ireland. Indeed, the past 
history of Ulster is but a portion of Scottish history inserted into that of 
Ireland ; a stone in the Irish mosaic of an entirely different quality and 
color from the pieces that surround it. 

Hence it is that in Ulster of the present day there is little difficulty in 
distinguishing the citizen of Scottish blood from the Episcopalian of English 
and the Roman Catholic of Irish descent. In the towns and districts where 
the Presbyterians are most numerous we find that, so far as names, language, 

1 66 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

habits of thought and action, and the testimony of recorded history can be 
taken, the population bears the most characteristic marks of a Scottish 
origin. 4 In the country districts, the peasant still retains the Scotch " bur " 
in his speech * ; devoutly believes in the doctrines of John Calvin and John 
Knox ; is firmly committed against everything allied with Popery or Prelacy ; 
and usually emphatic in his claims to a Scottish and his disavowal of an 
Irish descent. 6 

Not that all the Irish Scots are Presbyterians, however, nor all the Pres- 
byterians Scotch. From the days of Echlin and Leslie down, some of the 
most bitter opponents and persecutors of Ulster Presbyterianism and its 
adherents have been Scotchmen ; while some of its most useful and influen- 
tial supporters have come from the ranks of the English Puritans and the 
French Huguenots. 7 Nevertheless, the great bulk of the Presbyterian 
settlers in Ulster were from Scotland, and of this class was composed nearly 
the whole emigration from that country. In inquiring into the origin of 
these people, therefore, we must seek for it on the other side of the Irish 


1 The rector of the parish of Dungiven, in county Derry, writing in 1814, says : " The 
inhabitants of the parish are divided into two races of men, as totally distinct as if they 
belonged to different countries and regions. These, in order that we may avoid the invidious 
names of Protestant and Roman Catholic, which indeed have little to say in the matter, may 
be distinguished by the usual names of Scotch and Irish, the former including the descend- 
ants of all the Scotch and English colonists who have emigrated hither since the time of 
James I., and the latter comprehending the native and original inhabitants of the country. 
Than these, no two classes of men can be more distinct : the Scotch are remarkable for their 
comfortable houses and appearance, regular conduct, and perseverance in business, and their 
being almost entirely manufacturers ; the Irish, on the other hand, are more negligent in 
their habitations, less regular and guarded in their conduct, and have a total indisposition to 
manufacture. Both are industrious, but the industry of the Scotch is steady and patient, and 
directed with foresight, while that of the Irish is rash, adventurous, and variable." — Statistical 
Account of Ireland ', Dublin, 1814, vol. ii., p. 307. 

2 The numerous Protestant Kellys, Sullivans, Murphys, McMahons, and others show that 
there are exceptions to this general proposition. 

8 W. E. H. Lecky, England in the Eighteenth Century, vol. ii., p. 404. 

4 The two counties which have been most thoroughly transformed by this emigration are 
the two which are nearest Scotland, and were the first opened up for emigrants. These two 
have been completely altered in nationality and religion. They have become British, and in 
the main, certainly Scottish. Perhaps no better proof can be given than the family names of 
the inhabitants. Some years ago, a patient local antiquary took the voters' list of county 
Down " of those rated above ^12 for poor-rates," and analyzed it carefully. There were 
10,028 names on the list, and these fairly represented the whole proper names of the county. 
He found that the following names occurred oftenest, and arranged them in order of their 
frequency : Smith, Martin, M'Kie, Moore, Brown, Thompson, Patterson, Johnson, Stewart, 
Wilson, Graham, Campbell, Robinson, Bell, Hamilton, Morrow, Gibson, Boyd, Wallace, and 
Magee. He dissected as carefully the voters' list for county Antrim, in which there were 
9538 names, and found that the following were at the top : Thompson, Wilson, Stewart, 

Who Are the Scotch-Irish? 167 

Smith, Moore, Boyd, Johnson, M'Millan, Brown, Bell, Campbell, M'Neill, Crawford, 
M'Alister, Hunter, Macaulay, Robinson, Wallace, Millar, Kennedy, and Hill. The list 
has a very Scottish flavor altogether, although it may be noted that the names that are highest 
on the list are those which are common to both England and Scotland : for it may be taken 
for granted that the English " Thompson " has swallowed up the Scottish " Thomson," that 
" Moore" includes the Ayrshire " Muir," and that the Annandale '* Johnstones" have been 
merged by the writer in the English" Johnsons." One other point is very striking — that 
the great Ulster name of O'Neill is wanting, and also the Antrim " Macdonnel." . . . 
Another strong proof of the Scottish blood of the Ulstermen may be found by taking the 
annual reports presented to the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church of Ireland, 
held in June, 1887. Here are the names of the men, lay and clerical, who sign these reports, 
the names being taken as they occur : J. W. Whigham, Jackson Smith, Hamilton Magee, 
Thomas Armstrong, William Park, J. M. Rodgers, David Wilson, George Macfarland r 
Thomas Lyle, W. Rogers, J. B. Wylie, W. Young, E. F. Simpson, Alexander Turnbull, 
John Malcolm, John H. Orr. Probably the reports of our three Scottish churches taken 
together could not produce so large an average of Scottish surnames. — The Scot in Ulster r 
Edinburgh, 1888, pp. 103-105. 

5 Many of the settlers were English, but the larger and more influential element came 
from the Calvinists of Scotland. . . . To-day the speech of Ulster is Scotch rather than 
English, showing which nationality has predominated. — Douglas Campbell, The Puritan in 
Holland, England, and America y vol. ii., p. 474. 

• Towards the end of the last century ' 4 in all social and political matters the native Catho- 
lics, in other words the immense majority of the people of Ireland, were simply hewers of 
wood and drawers of water for Protestant masters, for masters who still looked on themselves 
as mere settlers, who boasted of their Scotch or English extraction, and who regarded the 
name of ' Irishman ' as an insult." — J. R. Green, History of the English People, book 
ix., ch. ii. 

Most of the great evils of Irish politics during the last two centuries have arisen from 
the fact that its different classes and creeds have never been really blended into one nation, 
that the repulsion of race or of religion has been stronger than the attraction of a common 
nationality, and that the full energies and intellect of the country have in consequence seldom 
or never been enlisted in a common cause. — Lecky, England in the Eighteenth Century, vol. 
ii., p. 505. Am. ed., pp. 440 and 441. Travellers tell us that to-day in sections of Ulster 
the population is Scotch and not Irish. 

1 A considerable portion of the English colonists, especially those who came to the Lon- 
don settlement in Londonderry county, were Puritans, and joined with the Scots in church 
affairs. A strong Calvinistic element was also afterwards infused into the district by the 
French Huguenots, who settled in different parts of Ireland after the Revocation of the Edict 
of Nantes. — Harrison, The Scot in Ulster, p. 21. 

" While along the shores of Down and Antrim, and by the banks of the Six-Mile Water 
and the Main, the colonists are almost wholly from the Lowlands of Scotland ; upon the 
shores of Derry and Donegal, and by the banks of the Foyle and the Bann, were planted by 
the action of the same far-seeing James Stuart, bands of English colonists. Large grants of 
land in the escheated counties of Ulster were bestowed upon the great London companies, 
and on their vast estates by the Foyle and the Bann were settled considerable numbers 
of fine old English families. The Englishmen may be easily traced to this very day in 
Derry, and Coleraine, and Armagh, and Enniskillen. Groups of these Puritans dotted the 
whole expanse of Ulster, and in a later hour, when the magnificent Cromwell took hold of 
Ireland, these English colonists were reinforced by not a few of the very bravest and strongest 
of the Ironsides. To this very hour I know where to lay my hands on the direct lineal de- 
scendants of some of Cromwell's most trusted officers, who brought to Ireland blood that 
flowed in the purest English veins. The defiant city of Derry was the fruit of the English 

1 68 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

settlement, the royal borough of Coleraine, the cathedral city of Armagh, the battle-swept 
Enniskillen, and several towns and hamlets along the winding Bann. Among these English 
settlers were not a few who were ardent followers of George Fox, that man who in many 
respects was Cromwell's equal, and in some his master ; these Friends came with a man of 
great force of character, Thomas Edmundson, who bore arms for the Parliament, and has left 
behind him a singularly interesting diary. The Friends came to Antrim in 1652, and settled 
in Antrim and Down ; hence come the Pims, the Barclays, the Grubbs, and Richardsons, 
with many another goodly name of Ulster. 

" The name of this Irish province was spreading over Europe by the second decade of 
the seventeenth century as the ' shelter of the hunted ' ; and soon the Puritan and the Quaker 
are joined in Ulster by another nobleman of God's making — the Huguenot from France. 
Headed by Louis Crommellin they came a little later and settled in and around Lisburn, 
founding many of the finest industries of Ulster, and giving mighty impulse to those already 
started. And still later, following the ' immortal William ' came some brave burghers from 
Holland and the Netherlands. Thus Ulster became a gathering ground for the very 
finest, most formative, impulsive, and aggressive of the free, enlightened, God-fearing 
peoples of Europe." — J. S. Macintosh, "The Making of the Ulsterman," Scotch-Irish 
Society of America Proceedings, vol. ii., pp. 98, 99. 



IT has been said of the modern Scottish race by some of its enthusiastic sons 
that, in proportion to its numbers, that race has produced more men who 
have taken a prominent part in the affairs of the English speaking world than 
has any other. Whether this be true or not, there are two facts bearing upon 
that phase of Scottish race-history to which attention may properly be 
called. The first and most important fact is, that nearly all the men of 
Scottish birth or descent who are renowned in history trace their family 
origin back to the western Lowlands of Scotland. That is to say, the district 
comprising the counties of Lanark, Renfrew, Ayr, Dumfries, Wigtown, Kirk- 
cudbright, and Dumbarton — in area about the same as Connecticut, and the 
most of which was formerly included in the Celto-British kingdom of Strath- 
clyde, — has produced a very large proportion of the men and families who 
have made the name of Scotland famous in the world's history. 1 

In this district are to be found the chief evidences in Scotland of the 
birth or residence of King Arthur and his Knights of the Round Table. 
Dumbartonshire is the reputed birthplace of St. Patrick, Ireland's teacher 
and patron saint. Elderslie, in Renfrewshire, is said to have been the birth- 
place of Scotland's national hero, William Wallace. Robert Bruce also, son 
of Marjorie, Countess of Carrick and daughter of Nigel or Niall (who was 
himself the Celtic Earl of Carrick and grandson of Gilbert, son of Fergus, Lord 
of Galloway), was, according to popular belief, born at his mother's castle of 
Turnberry, in Ayrshire. The seat of the High Stewards of Scotland, 
ancestors of the royal family of the Stuarts, was in Renfrewshire. The 
paternal grandfather of William Ewart Gladstone was born in Lanarkshire. 
John Knox's father is said to have belonged to the Knox family of Renfrew- 
shire. Robert Burns was born in Ayrshire. The sect called the " Lollards," 
who were the earliest Protestant reformers in Scotland, appear first in Scottish 
history as coming from Kyle in Ayrshire, the same district which afterwards 
furnished a large part of the leaders and armies of the Reformation. The 
Covenanters and their armies of the seventeenth century were mainly from 
the same part of the kingdom. Glasgow, the greatest manufacturing city of 
Europe, is situated in the heart of this district. These same seven coun- 
ties also furnished by far the greater part of the Scottish colonists of Ulster, 
in Ireland, from whom are descended a large proportion of ihe Scotch-Irish 
who have become famous in American history. 3 

The second fact about the race-history of Scotland and one that in a 
measure accounts for the first, is, that the population of the western Low- 
lands during the past six hundred years has consisted of a mixed or com- 


170 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

posite race, made up of a number of different and originally very dissimilar 
racial elements. The basis of the race was the Romanized Briton who lived 
u between the walls," built by the Romans across the island of Great Britain 
in the time of the Emperor Hadrian.* Chiefly from these early Britons — 
or Welsh (i. e., "aliens"), as they were called by the Anglic invaders, — 
the Ulster Scot gets his Celtic blood, and not from the Gaels of modern 
Ireland. The Britons were in part Brythonic or Cymric Celts, identical with 
some of the tribesmen of Gaul who are described by Caesar ; in part Gaelic 
Celts, who had preceded the Cymri some centuries in their migration to the 
islands ; in part non-Celtic and non-Aryan Aborigines, whom the Gaels 
found there ; and in part a blended race, comprising all these basic ele- 
ments, with an additional Roman element furnished from the Roman legions 
(provincial and imperial), which for four centuries traversed, harried, and 
dominated the island of Great Britain. As time passed, there came marked 
departures from the original type, occasioned by intermarriages, first with the 
Picts and Scots, then with the Angles and Danes who occupied and largely 
peopled the eastern coast of Scotland, and with the Norsemen, who settled in 
the southwest. 8 From the last-named stock comes most of the Teutonic 
blood of the Ulster Scots, or Scotch-Irish. After the eleventh century, the 
Normans came from England into Scotland in large numbers, and occupied 
much of the land, their leaders frequently intermarrying with the daughters 
of native Celtic chieftains. Long before the seventeenth century, in the 
early years of which the Scottish emigration to Ireland began, the various 
race-groups of the western Lowlands of Scotland had become fused into one 
composite whole, having the attributes of the Celt, the Norse, the Angle, and 
the Norman ; thus typifying many centuries ago the identical race which the 
world to-day is beginning to recognize as the American — an amalgamation 
of the Teutonic and the Celtic, having the staying qualities of the one, with 
the grace, adaptability, and mental brilliancy of the other. 

" The Scottish Lowlanders are a very mixed race," says Reclus, the 
French traveller and geographer, " and even their name is a singular proof 
of it. Scotland was originally known as Hibernia, or Igbernia, 4 whilst 
the name of Scotia, from the end of the sixth to the beginning of the eleventh 
century, was exclusively applied to modern Ireland. The two countries have 
consequently exchanged names." 

John of Fordun, the first of the early historians of Scotland whose writ- 
ings can even in part be relied upon, has given us the following description 
of Scotland as it existed in his day (he died shortly after 1384) : 

Scotia is so named after the Scottish tribes by which it is inhabited. At 
first, it began from the Scottish firth on the south, and, later on, from the 

* One wall ran east from the Clyde and the other from the Solway. 

Scotland of To-Day 171 

river Humber, where Albania also began. Afterwards, however, it com- 
menced at the wall Thirlwal, which Severus had built to the river Tyne. 
But now it begins at the river Tweed, the northern boundary of England, 
and, stretching rather less than four hundred miles in length, in a north- 
westerly direction, is bounded by the Pentland Firth, where a fearfully 
dangerous whirlpool sucks in and belches back the waters every hour. It is 
a country strong by nature, and difficult and toilsome of access. In some 
parts, it towers into mountains ; in others, it sinks down into plains. For 
lofty mountains stretch through the midst of it, from end to end, as do the 
tall Alps through Europe ; and these mountains formerly separated the Scots 
from the Picts, and their kingdoms from each other. Impassable as they are 
on horseback, save in very few places, they can hardly be crossed even on 
foot, both on account of the snow always lying on them, except in summer- 
time only ; and by reason of the boulders torn off the beetling crags, and the 
deep hollows in their midst. Along the foot of these mountains are vast 
woods full of stags, roe-deer, and other wild animals and beasts of various 
kinds ; and these forests oftentimes afford a strong and safe protection to the 
cattle of the inhabitants against the depredations of their enemies ; for the 
herds in those parts, they say, are accustomed, from use, whenever they hear 
the shouts of men and women, and if suddenly attacked by dogs, to flock 
hastily into the woods. Numberless springs also well up, and burst forth 
from the hills and the sloping ridges of the mountains, and, trickling down 
with sweetest sound, in crystal rivulets between flowery banks, flow together 
through the level vales, and give birth to many streams ; and these again to 
large rivers, in which Scotia marvellously abounds, beyond any other country; 
and at their mouths, where they rejoin the sea, she has noble and secure 

Scotia, also, has tracts of land bordering on the sea, pretty, level, and rich, 
with green meadows, and fertile and productive fields of corn and barley, and 
well adapted for growing beans, peas, and all other produce ; destitute, how- 
ever, of wine and oil, though by no means so of honey and wax. But in the 
upland districts, and along the highlands, the fields are less productive, except 
only in oats and barley. The country is, there, very hideous, interspersed 
with moors and marshy fields, muddy and dirty ; it is, however, full of pas- 
turage grass for cattle, and comely with verdure in the glens, along the water- 
courses. This region abounds in wool-bearing sheep, and in horses ; and its 
soil is grassy, feeds cattle and wild beasts, is rich in milk and wool, and mani- 
fold in its wealth of fish, in sea, river, and lake. It is also noted for birds of 
many sorts. There noble falcons, of soaring flight and boundless courage, 
are to be found, and hawks of matchless daring. Marble of two or three 
colors, that is, black, variegated, and white, as well as alabaster, is also 
found there. It also produces a good deal of iron and lead, and nearly all 

The manners and customs of the Scots vary with the diversity of their 
speech. For two languages are spoken amongst them, the Scottish and the 
Teutonic ; the latter of which is the language of those who occupy the sea- 
board and plains, while the race of Scottish speech inhabit the highlands and 
outlying islands. 6 The people of the coast are of domestic and civilized 
habits, trusty, patient, and urbane, decent in their attire, affable, and peace- 
ful, devout in Divine worship, yet always prone to resist a wrong at the hand 
of their enemies. The highlanders and people of the islands, on the other 
hand, are a savage and untamed nation, rude and independent, given to 
rapine, ease-loving, of a docile and warm disposition, comely in person, but 

17 2 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

unsightly in dress, hostile to the English people and language, and, owing to 
diversity of speech, even to their own nation, and exceedingly cruel. They 
are, however, faithful and obedient to their king and country, and easily 
made to submit to law if properly governed. 

The Picts or Caledonians, who lived in the country at the time of its 
conquest by the Romans, do not appear to have formed a strong element of 
the actual population of the Scottish Lowlands. 8 The inhabitants of that 
part of the country seem for the most part to be of British and Anglo-Celtic 
race. The line which separated the Britons from the Picts runs, approx- 
imately, across the isthmus of the Clyde and Forth ; the ancient wall of 
Antoninus thus marking an ethnological frontier no less than a political 
one. But Angles and Britons were compelled to share their territory with 
emigrants of various races, including the Scots of Ireland, Frisians, North- 
men, and Danes. " At some places," says Reclus, " and more especially 
along the coast, people of different origin live in close contact with each 
other, and yet remain separate. Their blood has not mingled ; habits, 
customs, and modes of thought and action have remained distinct. Along the 
whole of the coast, on that of the German Ocean, no less than on that of the 
Irish Sea, we meet with colonies of fishermen, some of whom claim descent 
from the Northmen, whilst others look upon the Danes as their ancestors. 
There are even colonies which tradition derives from Flanders. Several of 
the maritime villages consist of two portions like the towns on the coasts of 
Catalonia, Liguria, and Sicily, the upper part being inhabited by Saxon arti- 
sans and agriculturists, while the lower part forms the * Marina ' of Scandi- 
navian fishermen. These various elements of the population have, however, 
become fused in the greater part of the country. Physically the Scotchman 
resembles the Norwegian, and this is not solely due to a similarity of climate, 
but also to the numerous unions between Scandinavian invaders and the 
daughters of the country. The languages of the two countries also possess 
more features in common than was formerly believed. The Scotch speak 
English with a peculiar accent which at once betrays their origin. Their 
intonation differs from that of the English, and they suppress certain con- 
sonants in the middle and at the end of words. They still employ certain 
old English terms, no longer made use of to the south of the Tweed, and, 
on the strength of this, patriotic Scotchmen claim to speak English with 
greater purity than their southern neighbors. Amongst the many words of 
foreign derivation in common use, there are several French ones, not only 
such as were introduced by the Normans, but also others belonging to the 
time when the two peoples were faithful allies, and supplied each other with 

" The Scotch Lowlander is, as a rule, of fair height, long-legged, strongly 
built, and without any tendency to the obesity so common amongst his kins- 
men of England. His eye is ordinarily brighter than that of the English- 
man, and his features more regular ; but his cheeks are more prominent, 

Scotland of To-Day 173 

and the leanness of the face helps much to accentuate these features. In 
these respects he bears a striking resemblance to his American cousins. 
Comparative inquiries instituted by Forbes prove that physical development 
is somewhat slower amongst Scotchmen than amongst Englishmen ; the for- 
mer comes up to the latter in height and strength only at the age of nine- 
teen, but in his ripe age he surpasses him to the extent of about five per 
cent, in muscular strength. 7 Of all the men of Great Britain, those of south- 
western Scotland are distinguished for their tall stature. The men of Gal- 
loway average 5 feet 7 inches in height, which is superior to the stature 
attained in any other district of the British Islands. The Lowlander is in- 
telligent, of remarkable sagacity in business, and persevering when once he 
has determined upon accomplishing a task ; but his prudence degenerates 
into distrust, his thrift into avarice. As in America, there is not a village 
without one or more banks. When abroad he seeks out his fellow-country- 
men, derives a pleasure in being useful to them, and helps their success in 
life to the best of his ability. 

" The achievements of Scotch agriculturists, who are so little favored by 
climate, must appear marvellous to the peasants of Italy and of many parts 
of France. Under the fifty-sixth degree of latitude they secure crops far 
more abundant than those obtained from the fertile lands on the Mediterra- 
nean, which are nine hundred miles nearer to the equator. Human labor 
and ingenuity have succeeded in acclimatizing plants which hardly appear to 
be suited to the soil and climate of Scotland. About the middle of the 
eighteenth century a patch of wheat was pointed out near Edinburgh as a 
curiosity, whilst now that cereal grows in abundance as far north as the 
Moray Firth. And yet it appears as if the climate had become colder, for 
it is no longer possible to cultivate the poppy or tobacco, as was done in the 
beginning of the century. Several varieties of apples, pears, and prunes, 
formerly in high repute, no longer arrive at maturity, and the horticultural 
societies have ceased offering prizes for these productions, because it is no 
longer possible to grow them in the open air. The manufacturing triumphs 
of Scotland have been quite equal to those achieved -in agriculture, and it is 
on Scottish soil that Glasgow, the foremost manufacturing town of the 
United Kingdom, has arisen, with a population greater than that of either 
Manchester, Leeds, or Birmingham. Scotland, through her numerous emi- 
grants who live in London and the other great towns, has also largely con- 
tributed towards the prosperity of England. The hawkers in the English 
manufacturing districts are usually known as ' Scotchmen.' The Scotch 
colonists in New Zealand and Canada are amongst the most active and in- 
dustrious, and the young Lowlanders who go out to India as government 
officials are far more numerous in proportion than those from England. 

" The love of education for its own sake, and not merely as a means to an 
end, is far more widely spread in Scotland than in England. The lectures 
at the universities are attended with a zeal which the students of Oxford 

174 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

or Cambridge seldom exhibit. It is by no means rare to meet pupils in 
elementary schools who are passionately fond of study, and the humble homes 
of artisans and laborers frequently contain a select library which would do 
credit to a wealthy English tradesman. At the same time there are not 
wanting young men who accelerate their studies in order that they may se- 
cure the certificates which form their passport to lucrative employment. 
They work hard, no doubt, but they strive not after knowledge, but for ma- 
terial gain. The students of Edinburgh have little time to devote to those 
exercises of strength and skill which are so highly cultivated at Oxford and 
Cambridge. 8 By a curious contrast, these Scotchmen, so practical and full 
of common sense, have an extraordinary love for the supernatural. They 
delight in stories of terror and of ghosts. Though clever architects of their 
own fortunes, they are yet fatalists, and the religious sects of which most of 
them are members defend with singular fervor the doctrine of predestina- 
tion. Thousands amongst the peasants, dressed in clerical black, are veri- 
table theologians, and know how to discuss the articles of their faith with a 
great luxury of Scripture texts. As Emerson says, they allow their dialectics 
to carry them to the extremes of insanity. In no other country of the world 
is the Sabbath observed with such rigor as in Scotland. On that day many 
of the trains and steamers cease running, and silence reigns throughout the 
land. There are even landed proprietors who taboo their hills on that day, 
and if a tourist is found wandering amongst them he is treated as a reckless 
violator of the proprieties." 

Who were the earliest inhabitants of the Scottish Highlands ? Of what 
race were the Picts, who formerly inhabited the country, and over whom 
even the Romans could not triumph ? Were they pure Celts, or had their 
blood already mingled with that of Scandinavia ? It is usually believed that 
the Picts had preceded the other Britons in their migration to the island, 
coming at a very early age, and that their idioms differed much more from 
the dialect spoken in Gaul than did Cymric. They originally inhabited, 
perhaps, the whole of Great Britain, and were pushed to the northward by 
the Britons, who in turn were displaced by Romans and Angles. 9 

Numerous stone monuments, known as Picts' " houses," or weems, and 
invariably consisting of a chamber or centre passage surrounded by smaller 
apartments, are attributed to these aborigines. The mainland, and to a 
great extent the islands, abound in broughs, or borgs — that is, towers of 
defence, resembling, at least externally, the nuraghe of Sardinia. On the 
Shetland Islands there are seventy-five of these towers, and in the Orkneys 
seventy. Petrie, who has examined forty of them, looked upon them as 
fortified dwelling-houses. Their circular walls are twelve feet and more in 
thickness ; their original height is not known, for every one of them has 
reached us in a partial state of demolition. Pestles for crushing corn, stone 
lamps, and vessels made of the bone of whales testify to the rudimentary 
state of civilization which the inhabitants had attained. The Brough of 

Scotland of To-Day 175 

Mousa, to the south of Lerwick, bulges out near its base, probably to prevent 
the use of scaling ladders, and recesses occur at regular intervals on the 
inside of the wall. Cromlechs, cairns, standing stones, symbolical sculptures, 
circles of stones, pile dwellings, and vitrified forts are found in several local- 
ities both on the mainland and the islands. Primitive monuments of this 
kind form one of the most salient landscape features in the Orkneys. On 
Pomona there is a district of several square miles in area which still abounds 
in prehistoric monuments of every description, although many stones have 
been carried away by the neighboring farmers. In the tumulus of Meashow, 
opened in 186 1, were discovered over nine hundred Runic inscriptions, and 
the carved images of fanciful animals. On the same island are the standing 
stones of Stennis ; and on Lewis, twelve miles to the west of Stornoway, the 
" gray stones of Callernish." These latter, forty-eight in number, are also 
known as Tuirsachan, or " Field of Mourning," and they still form a perfect 
circle, partly buried in peat, which has grown to a height of from six to 
twelve feet around them. 10 We know that these constructions belong to 
different ages, and that now and then the stones raised by the earliest build- 
ers were added to by their successors. Christian inscriptions in oghams and 
runes, in characters not older, according to Munch, than the beginning of the 
twelfth century, have been discovered on these monuments. At Newton, in 
Aberdeenshire, there is a stone inscribed in curiously shaped letters, not yet 

Notwithstanding a change of religion, these sacred places of the ancient 
inhabitants still attract pilgrims. On South Uist the people until recently 
walked in procession around a huge pile of rocks, turning thrice in following 
the apparent path of the sun. The small island of Iona at the western 
extremity of Mull is one of those places which have been held sacred for 
generations. Various stone monuments prove that this spot was held in 
veneration at the dawn of history, and this probably induced the Irish 
apostle, St. Columba, to found here a monastery — the " light of the western 
world " — which soon became the most famous in Great Britain. Hence 
went forth those ascetic Culdees whom the jealousy of the clergy caused to 
disappear in the course of the thirteenth century." In the ruined ecclesias- 
tical buildings of this islet are buried more than sixty kings of Scotland, 
Ireland, and the Hebrides, the last interred here having been Macbeth. A 
prophecy says that one day the whole earth will be swallowed up by a 
deluge, with the exception of Iona. There was a time when this venerated 
island was interdicted to women, as Mount Athos is at the present day. Not 
far from the church lay the " black stones," thus called on account of the 
malediction attaching to him who foreswore himself by their side. It was 
here that the " Lords of the Isles," kneeling on the ground with their hands 
raised to heaven, were bound to swear to maintain intact the rights of their 
vassals. 13 Among the heaps of rocks piled up on the beach, it is said by 
monks in expiation of their trespasses, are found fine fragments of granite, 

176 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

porphyry, and serpentine, which the inhabitants employ Scotch workmen to 
cut and polish, in order that they may sell them as amulets to their visitors. 
Formerly these stones were looked upon throughout the Hebrides as the 
most efficacious medicine against sorcery ; and when about to be married a 
bridegroom, to insure happiness, placed a stone of Iona upon his bare 
left foot. 1 * 

The Scotch Highlanders are more or less mixed with Scandinavians, for 
the Northmen, who for centuries held possession of the Orkneys, gained a 
footing also upon the mainland, where they founded numerous colonies. 
Scandinavian family names are frequent in the Orkneys, but the type of the 
inhabitants is nevertheless Scotch. 14 The geographical nomenclature of 
the Shetland Isles is wholly Norwegian. The names of farms terminate in 
seter or ster, and those of hills in hoy or hole. In 1820 the sword dance of 
the ancient Norwegians might still be witnessed on one of the islands, and, 
according to Gifford, 16 Norse was spoken in a few families as recently as 
1786. Sutherland clearly formed part of the old domain of the North- 
men. That county lies at the northern extremity of Scotland ; but to the 
inhabitant of the Orkneys it was a Southern Land, and the name which they 
gave to it has survived to our own time. 

A few Scandinavian colonies on the mainland have retained their distinct 
character. As an instance may be mentioned the village of Ness on Lewis, 
the inhabitants of which are distinguished for their enterprise, presenting a 
singular contrast to the sluggishness of their Gaelic neighbors. The descend- 
ants of these hostile races have, like oil and water, long refused to mingle. 
It would nevertheless be next to impossible to define the boundaries between 
the various races throughout the country. Language certainly would prove 
no safe guide, for many of the Gaels have given up their language and speak 
English. Out of 5,000,000 Scotchmen, only 350,000 are able to express 
themselves in Gaelic, and of these only 70,000 are ignorant of English. 1 * As 
to the Scandinavians, not one amongst their descendants now speaks Old 
Norse. The greater number of them speak English, but many, too, have 
adopted Gaelic. In most of the islands the names of places are Danish, 
although Gaelic has for centuries been the spoken language. Even in St. 
Kilda, remote as is its situation, an intermingling of Gaels and Northmen has 
been recognized. 

The use of Gaelic was discontinued at the court of Scotland about 
the middle of the eleventh century, and it is doomed to disappear. Far 
poorer in its literature and less cultivated than Welsh, its domain diminishes 
with every decade, for English is now almost universally spoken in the 
towns, and the Highland valleys are becoming depopulated, or invaded by 
Saxon sportsmen and graziers. If Caledonia really stands for Gael-Dun, or 
" Mountain of the Gael," then its limits are becoming narrower every time 
the meshes of the network of railroads are drawn tighter. But though 
Celtic may disappear as a spoken language, the geographical nomenclature: 

Scotland of To-Day 177 

of Scotland will for all time bear witness to its ancient domination. Those 
acquainted with Gaelic may obtain a tolerably correct notion of the relief of 
the ground by merely studying the names upon a map. Names like ben, 
earn, carr, carragh, cnoc, ereag, cruach, dun, mam, meal, monadh, sguir, sith, 
sithean, sliabh, stob, slue, tolm, torr, and tullich, will suggest to their minds 
variously shaped mountains ; eye, i, and innis denote islands ; linne and loch 
represent lakes or gulfs ; abh, abhuinn, uisge, esk, and buinne, stand for rivers 
or torrents. Inver in the west, and Aber in the east, indicate the mouths of 
rivers. The names Albainn, Albeinn, or Albion, by which the Gaels were 
formerly designated, are now applied to all Britain. The Gaelic bards speak 
of their fellow-countrymen by preference as Albannaich, or " Mountaineers." 1T 
The Albannaich of the Grampians and the Albanians of the Pindus are thus 
known by a similar name, having possibly the same meaning. 

The translation of one of John Knox's religious works was the first book 
printed in Gaelic, and thus, as in Wales, the Reformation conferred upon 
the language of the people an importance which it had not possessed before. 
But whilst in Wales religious zeal, through its manifestation in the pulpit 
and the press, has contributed in a large measure to keep alive the native 
idiom, the division of the Highlanders into Roman Catholics and Protestants 
has resulted in a diminution of the collective patriotism of the people, as it 
reveals itself in language. Roman Catholics are numerous in the county of 
Inverness, and it merely depended upon the chief of a clan whether his 
followers remained true to the old faith or embraced the new. Canna and 
Eigg are the only Hebrides the inhabitants of which remained Roman 
Catholics. Those of the larger island of Rum, it is said, hesitated what to 
do, when the chief of the MacLeods, armed with a yellow cudgel, threw 
himself in the way of a procession marching in the direction of the Romish 
church, and drove the faithful to the temple which he patronized. 
Hence Protestantism on that island is known to the present day as the " Re- 
ligion of the Yellow Cudgel." 18 But notwithstanding these changes of religion 
many superstitions survive amongst the people. In Lewis, " stone " and 
" church " are synonymous terms, as they were in the time when all religious 
ceremonies were performed around sacred megaliths. 19 

The fame of the Highlanders had been sung by poets and novelists, 
until they came to be looked upon as typical for bravery, loyalty, and all 
manly virtues. The soldiers in their strange and showy garb have so 
frequently won distinction upon the field of battle that all their panegyrists 
said about their native virtues was implicitly believed ; and on the faith of 
poets we admired their pipers, the successors of the ancient bards, who 
accompanied their melancholy chants on the harp. In reality, however, the 
Highlanders, until recently, were warlike herdsmen, as the Montenegrins, 
Mirdits, and Albanians are even now, always at enmity with their neighbors. 
It was only after forts had been built at the mouths of the valleys, and 
military roads constructed through their territories, that they were reduced 

178 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

to submission. The members of each family were closely united, and, like 
American Indians, they had their war cries, badges, and distinctly patterned 
tartans. The people were thus split up into about forty clans, or, including 
the Lowland families, into about one hundred, and several of these clans con- 
sisted of more than 10,000 individuals. The principal Highland clans in 
1863 were : MacGregors, 36,000 ; MacKenzies, 21,000 ; MacLeans, 
16,000 ; MacLeods, 14,000 ; Macintoshes, 11,000 ; MacDonalds, 10,000. 
The members of each clan, though sometimes only cousins a hundred times 
removed, all bore the same name, and they fought and worked together. 
The land was originally held in union, being periodically divided amongst 
the clan. The honor of the tribe was dear to every one of its individual 
members, and an injury done to one amongst them was avenged by the 
entire community. When the kings of Scotland had to complain of a High- 
land chief, they attacked his clan, for they well knew that every member of 
it would embrace the cause of the chief. There existed no courts of justice 
in the Highlands, but blood was spilt for blood. Various monuments recall 
such acts of savage vengeance, and as recently as 181 2 a Highland family 
set up seven grinning heads as a trophy to commemorate a sevenfold 
murder committed by its ancestors. A cavern on Eigg Island is strewn with 
human bones, the relics of the ancient inhabitants of the island, two hundred 
in number, who are said to have been suffocated within the cavern by a 
neighboring chief, MacLeod, in retaliation for some private injury. 20 

As long as every member of the community possessed a share in the land, 
Scotland was spared the struggle between rich and poor. But by the close 
of the eighteenth century, the poorer members of the clan, though still claim- 
ing cousinship with their chief, had lost all proprietary rights in the land, 
and the lairds, when remonstrated with by the clan, responded in the words 
of the device adopted by the earls of Orkney, " Sic fuit, est, et erit! " They 
were even then able to drive away the ancient inhabitants from the plots of 
land they occupied, in order that they might transform them into pasturing 
or shooting grounds. Several landlords even burned down the cabins of 
their poor " cousins," thus compelling them to leave the country. Between 
181 1 and 1820, 15,000 tenants were thus evicted from the estates of the 
Duchess of Stafford. 

Entire villages were given up to the flames, and on a single night three 
hundred houses might have been seen afire. Nearly the whole population of 
four parishes was in this way driven from its homes. Since the middle of the 
century about one million acres in the Highlands have been cleared of human 
beings and sheep, to be converted into shooting grounds. 21 Thus, contrary 
to what may be usually witnessed in civilized countries, the Highland 
valleys are returning to a state of nature, and wild beasts taking the place 
of domesticated animals. The country formerly almost bare of trees has 
been largely planted, and from Black Mount in Argyleshire to Marr Forest 
in Aberdeen there now extends an almost unbroken belt of verdure. Already 

Scotland of To-Day 179 

the shooting grounds cover over two million acres, and they are continually- 
extending. Scotland has emphatically become a sporting country, and many 
a large estate is managed as a shooting ground, that proving more profitable 
to its proprietor than would its cultivation. There are not wanting sports- 
men willing to pay ^400 for a salmon stream, ^1000 for the right of shoot- 
ing over a moor, or ^4000 for a deer park. With these rents a salmon may 
cost £2> and a stag ^"40. In 1877, 2060 shooting grounds in Scotland 
were let for ^6oo,ooo. 22 Scotland, even more than England, is a land of 
wide demesnes, and twenty-one individuals share between them the third 
of the kingdom, seventy the half, and one thousand and seven hundred 
nine-tenths of it. The Duke of Sutherland alone owns about the fifteenth 
part of Scotland, including nearly the whole county from which he derives 
his title. Domains of such vast extent cannot be properly cultivated, and 
heaths and swamps which would repay the labor bestowed upon them by 
peasant proprietors are allowed by their wealthy owners to remain in a state 
of nature. 

In the Orkneys, a portion of the land is still owned by odallers, or peasant 
proprietors ; but the Shetland Islands and several of the Hebrides, includ- 
ing Lewis, the largest amongst them, belong to a single proprietor, who thus 
disposes indirectly of the lives of the inhabitants, whom he can compel to 
abandon their homes whenever it suits his interests. Several islands, such 
as Barra and Rum, which formerly supported a considerable population, 
have in this way become almost deserts ; and amongst the inhabitants left 
behind there are even now many who live in a state of extreme poverty, who 
look upon carrageen, or Iceland moss, as a luxury, and who are dependent 
upon seaweeds and fish for their daily sustenance. Owing to the inferiority 
of the food, dyspepsia is a common complaint, and certain physicians de- 
clare that the gift of " second sight," which plays so prominent a part in the 
history of the Highlanders, is traceable to a disorder of the organs of diges- 
tion. The villages of Lewis are perhaps unique of their kind in Europe. 
The inhabitants gather the stones embedded in the peaty soil to construct 
rough concentric walls, filling the space between them with earth and gravel. 
A scaffolding made of old oars and boughs supports a roof covered with 
earth and peat, leaving a wide ledge on the top of the circular wall, upon 
which vegetation soon springs up, and which becomes the favorite prom- 
enade and playground of children, dogs, and sheep. A single door gives 
access to this unshapely abode, within which a peat fire is kept burning 
throughout the year, in order that the damp which perpetually penetrates 
through the wall and roof may evaporate. Horses, cows, and sheep, all of 
diminutive stature, owing to the want of nourishment, occupy one extremity 
of this den, while the fowls roost by the side of the human inhabitants, or 
perch near the hole left for the escape of the smoke. To strangers the 
heat and smoke of these dwellings are intolerable, but the former is said 
to favor the laying of eggs." Such are the abodes of most of the 

180 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

inhabitants of Lewis. Yet the claims to comfort have increased since the 
commencement of the nineteenth century, and a porringer is no longer 
looked upon as a veritable curiosity. 


1 It may be not without interest to note here the names of the twenty-nine American 
Immortals, for whom memorial tablets have been placed in the Hall of Fame, erected during 
the year 1900 on University Heights in the city of New York. The names were selected by 
a jury of ninety-seven members, composed of twenty-five college presidents, twenty-six profes- 
sors of science and history, twenty-three publicists, editors, and authors, and twenty-three 
justices of state and national supreme courts. The result of this selection was as follows, 
the number of votes cast for each candidate being appended : 

George Washington (97), Abraham Lincoln (96), Daniel Webster (96), Benjamin Frank- 
lin (94), Ulysses S. Grant (92), John Marshall (91), Thomas Jefferson (90), Ralph Waldo 
Emerson (87), Henry W. Longfellow (85), Robert Fulton (85), Washington Irving (83), Jon- 
athan Edwards (81), Samuel Finley Breese Morse (80), David G. Farragut (79), Henry Clay 
(74), Nathaniel Hawthorne (73), George Peabody (72), Robert E. Lee (69), Peter Cooper 
(69), Horace Mann (67), Eli Whitney (67), John James Audubon (67), Henry Ward 
Beecher (66), James Kent (65), Joseph Story (64), John Adams (61), William Ellery Chan- 
ning (58), Gilbert Stuart (52), Asa Gray (51), 

Of the twenty-nine names given above, the bearers of seven were of Scottish descent 
in the male line — Webster, Grant, Fulton, Irving, Cooper, Stuart, and Gray ; Marshall was 
Welsh and Scotch ; Morse, English and Scotch ; Jefferson, Welsh, English, and Scotch ; 
Farragut, Spanish ; Audubon, French and Spanish : Clay, uncertain ; Edwards, Welsh ; 
Adams, English and Welsh ; and the remaining fourteen English. Of the other names voted 
on by the jury, the fifteen receiving the most votes under the number necessary to elect (fifty- 
one) were as follows, the names of those of Scottish descent (six out of fifteen) being printed 
in italics: John C. Calhoun (49), Andrew Jackson (49), John Quincy Adams (48), William 
Cullen Bryant (48), James Madison (48), Rufus Choate (47), Mark Hopkins (47), Elias Howe 
(47), Horace Greeley (45), Joseph Henry (44), James B. Eads (42), Benjamin Rush (42), John 
Lothrop Motley (41), Patrick Henry (39), Edgar Allan Poe (37). 

Thus of the forty-four Americans receiving the highest number of votes, sixteen were of 
Scottish origin in whole or part, thirteen being of Scottish descent in the male line. 

8 The ancient Celto-Scottish kingdom of Strathclyde, which, as late as the eleventh cen- 
tury, extended from the Clyde to the river Ribble, in Lancashire, England, and formed part 
of the domain of Malcolm Canmore, King of the Scots in the time of William the Conqueror, 
was the ancestral home, not only of the Scotch-Irish and many of the heroes of Scotland, 
but also of the families of Washington, Jackson, and Taylor, which have furnished three 
presidents to the United States. 

3 The reader will of course remark that of the four kingdoms — Dalriadic Irish, Pictish, 
British of Strathclyde, and English of Bernica — the two latter realms extended far south be- 
yond the line of modern Scotland. This fact had remarkable consequences in Scottish 
history. Otherwise the existence of these four kingdoms mainly interests us as showing the 
nature of the races — Pictish, British, Irish, and English — who were, then, the inhabitants of 
various parts of Scotland, leaving, doubtless, their strain of blood in the population. A 
Dumfries, Ayr, Renfrew, Lanark, or Peebles man, as a dweller in Strathclyde, has some 
chance of remote British (Brython) ancestors in his pedigree ; a Selkirk, Roxburgh, Berwick- 
shire, or Lothian man is probably for the most part of English blood ; an Argyleshire man is 
or may be descended from an Irish Scot or Dalriad ; the northern shires are partly Pictish, 
as also is Galloway, always allowing for the perpetual mixture of races in really historical and 
in prehistoric times. — Andrew Lang, History of Scotland, vol. i., p. 31. 

Scotland of To-Day 181 

4 See Strabo, book i., ch. iv. ; book ii., ch. i., v.; book iv., ch. v. 

6 If a line is drawn from a point on the eastern bank of Loch Lomond, somewhat south 
of Ben Lomond, following in the main the line of the Grampians, and crossing the Forth at 
Aberfoil, the Teith at Callander, the Almond at Crieff, the Tay at Dunkeld, the Ericht at 
Blairgowrie, and proceeding through the hills of Brae Angus till it reaches the great range of 
the Mounth, then crossing the Dee at Ballater, the Spey at Lower Craigellachie, till it reaches 
the Moray Firth at Nairn — this forms what was called the Highland Line and separated the 
Celtic from the Teutonic-speaking people. Within this line, with the exception of the county 
of Caithness, which belongs to the Teutonic division, the Gaelic language forms the vernacu- 
lar of the inhabitants. — Celtic Scotland, ii., 453. 

The Scottish Highlands are sometimes spoken of so as to convey the impression that 
there is a clearly defined mountain district, contrasted with " the Lowlands," as though the 
latter were a vast plain. There could hardly be a greater mistake. From Kirkcudbright to 
Caithness, there is hardly a county without its hill ranges ; and without leaving the Southern 
district, the lover of mountain beauty will find noble heights and solitary glens, with many 
a rippling burn from tarns among the hills. — Samuel G. Green, Scottish Pictures, p. 117. 

6 This description of the present inhabitants of the Lowlands and Highlands of Scotland 
is chiefly taken from Elisee Reclus's La Terre, Appleton's American edition, 1883. Reclus 
bases on Kemble, Saxons in England ; Latham, Ethnology of the British Isles ; Murray, 
in Philological Society's Transactions, 1873, etc - 

7 Forbes ; Hugh Miller, First Impressions of England and the English. 

8 Demogeot and Montucci, De V enseignement superieur en Angleterre et en Ecosse. 

9 Just as Highland scenery has come to be reckoned peculiarly Scottish scenery, not 
only by Englishmen and foreigners, but even by the inhabitants of the Lowlands themselves, 
to whom its lakes and glens, its stony precipices and wind-swept isles are as familiar and dear 
as they were once dreaded and disliked ; so in some important aspects, of which war is per- 
haps the chief, the Highlander has become the typical Scot, and the Lowlander, who mainly 
shaped the fortunes of the nation and gave it its place in history, has acquiesced in the repre- 
sentation and is proud of the disguise. No harm can follow from this if we only keep stead- 
ily in view the true ethnological condition of Scotland, and realize the fact that while in 
Southern Britain the Saxons and Angles almost wholly superseded the original Cymric pop- 
ulation, there is no evidence that a similar act ever took place in North Britain ; there is no 
record of a Teutonic settlement except in the southeast, and there is no probability that the 
Picts between Drumalban and the eastern sea, or even the Cymry of Strathclyde, though 
they lost their language and their independence, were ever expelled from their original seats, 
or transformed in character by any extraordinary infusion of a Teutonic element. — J. M. 
Ross, Scottish History and Literature , p. 15. 

10 Wilson's Prehistoric Annals of Scotland. 

11 Jameson's History of the Culdees. 

18 Forbes Leslie, Early Races of Scotland. 

13 Mercey, Revue des Deux Mondes, Sept., 1838. 

14 Hugh Miller, Footprints of the Creator. 

15 Historical Description of Zetland. 

16 E. G. Ravenstein, On the Celtic Languages in the British Isles, 

17 Forbes Leslie, Early Races of Scotland. 

18 Dr. Johnson, Tour in the Western Hebrides. 

19 Anderson Smith, Lewisiana. 

80 Hugh Miller, Cruise of the "Betsey" 

81 Hugh Miller, Sutherland as it Was and Is. 
88 Official Journal, Nov. 16, 1877. 

83 Anderson Smith, Lewisiana. 



OF the inhabitants of Britain in prehistoric times we can learn but 
little, and that only in the most general way. While the literature on 
the subject is quite extensive, and, so far as it records the results of archaeo- 
logical investigation, not without considerable value, yet the data thus far 
made available are so fragmentary as to form a basis for hardly anything more 
than a probable supposition as to who they were and whence they came. 1 
The following summary by one of the recent English authorities 3 gives us a 
hint of the progress thus far made in this line of inquiry : 

From the bones which have been taken from the tombs, and from the 
ancient flint-mines uncovered in Sussex and Norfolk, the anatomists have 
concluded that the Neolithic Britons were not unlike the modern Eskimo. 
They were short and slight, with muscles too much developed for their 
slender and ill-nurtured bones ; and there is that marked disproportion be- 
tween the size of the men and women, which indicates a hard and miserable 
life, where the weakest are overworked and constantly stinted of their food. 
The face must have been of an oval shape, with mild and regular fea- 
tures : the skulls, though bulky in some instances, were generally of a long 
and narrow shape, depressed sometimes at the crown and marked with a 
prominent ridge, " like the keel of a boat reversed." 8 . . . 

The oldest races were in apre-metallic stage, when bronze was introduced 
by a new nation, sometimes identified with the oldest Celts, but now more 
generally attributed to the Finnish or Ugrian stock. When the Celts arrived 
in their turn, they may have brought in the knowledge of iron and silver ; 
the Continental Celts are known to have used iron broad-swords at the battle 
of the Anio in the fourth century before Christ, and iron was certainly 
worked in Sussex by the Britons of Julius Caesar's time ; but as no objects 
of iron have been recovered from our Celtic tumuli, except in some instances 
of a doubtful date, it will be safer to assume that the British Celts belonged 
to the later Bronze Age as well as to the Age of Iron. 4 

With reference to the earliest population of Scotland, the following 
hypothesis given by Samuel Laing in his work on Prehistoric Remains of 
Caithness may be taken as a fairly comprehensive statement : 

Our population contains three distinct ethnological elements : I. Xan- 
thochroi brachycephali (the fair, broad-headed type) ; II. Xanthochroi 
dolichocephali (the fair, long-headed type); III. Melanchroi (the dark type). 
In Caesar's time, and for an indefinitely long period, Gaul contained the first 
and third of these elements, and the shores of the Baltic presented the 
second. In other words, the ethnological elements of the Hiberno-British 
islands are identical with those of the nearest adjacent parts of the continent 
of Europe, at the earliest period when a good observer noted the characters 
of their population. 


The Caledonians, or Picts 183 

Dr. Thurnam has adduced many good reasons for believing that the 
" Belgic " element intruded upon a pre-existing dolichocephalic ' Iberian " 
population ; but I think it probable that this element hardly reached 
Ireland at all, and extended but little into Scotland. However, if this were 
the case, and no other elements entered into the population, the tall, fair, 
red-haired and blue-eyed dolichocephalia, who are, and appear always to 
have been, so numerous among the Irish and Scotch, could not be accounted 

But their existence becomes intelligible at once, if we suppose that long 
before the well-known Norse and Danish invasions a stream of Scandinavi- 
ans had set into Scotland and Ireland, and formed a large part of our primi- 
tive population. And there can be no difficulty in admitting this hypothesis 
when we recollect that the Orkneys and the Hebrides have been, in compara- 
tively late historical times, Norwegian possessions. ... In another 
fashion, the fair and broad-headed " Belgae " intruded into the British area ; 
but meeting with a large dolichocephalic population, which at subsequent 
times was vastly reinforced by Anglo-Saxon, Norse, and Danish invasions, 
this type has been almost wiped out of the British population, which is, in the 
main, composed of fair dolichocephalia and dark dolichocephalia. . . . 
But language has in no respect followed these physical changes. The fair 
dolichocephali and fair brachycephali of Germany, Scandinavia, and Eng- 
land speak Teutonic dialects ; while those of France have a substantially 
Latin speech ; and the majority of those of Scotland, and, within historic 
times, all those of Ireland, spoke Celtic tongues. As to the Melanchroi, 
some speak Celtic, some Latin, some Teutonic dialects ; while others, like the 
Basques (so far as they come under this category) have a language of their 

So far as any definite conclusions can be deduced from the work of the 
ethnologists and archaeologists, it appears that the first Celtic invaders to 
enter Scotland (whether at a period simultaneous with or prior or subse- 
quent to the advent of the Stone-Age Britons in that part of the island can- 
not perhaps be definitely told) were the Gaels, or Goidels, who had crossed 
over into Britain from Gaul, first settling on those portions of the coast most 
easy of access from the points of embarkation, thence pushing into the interior, 
and gradually spreading to the west and north. In their progress they must 
have encountered and, to a greater or less extent, superseded the aborigines 
— the Britons of the Stone Age. This may have been done by exterminating 
them, by driving them off towards the west, or by assimilating them with 
themselves. Probably all of these methods of race extinction were 
brought into operation. In such a primitive age, these tribes, native 
and foreign, cannot be conceived to have been other than loosely organized 
hordes of wandering savages, preying upon one another, without fixed habi- 
tations, and to whom all weaker strangers were foredoomed enemies. The 
Celts, bringing with them from the Continent the knowledge of bronze and 
iron, would have considerable advantage in battle over the aborigines, who 
had no more effective weapons than sharpened stones. In those days, also, 
it is reasonable to suppose that the country was so sparsely populated that 
for centuries after the first coming of the Gaels, there would be room enough 

184 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

on the island for both races ; and many bodies of the aborigines no doubt 
remained unmolested long after the extinction of their race had been in part 
accomplished. 5 As fresh waves of invasion swept over the eastern shores, 
the Celts first coming would be apt to be driven farther and farther inland from 
the coast, and would in turn displace the natives — who, to escape death or 
slavery, would be obliged to push farther westward and northward. Some 
of these (supposed) aborigines, however, seem to have made a successful 
stand against the encroachments of the newcomers, and among them we find 
two tribes who were identified with portions of Scotland down to a date 
long after the beginning of the historic era. These were the Novantae and 
Selgovae mentioned by Ptolemy, whose territory in his time (the early part 
of the second century) embraced the country west of the river Nith and 
south of the Ayr — Kirkcudbrightshire and Galloway — and possibly, also, 
the peninsula of Kintyre, in Argyle. Toward the end of the Roman occupa- 
tion they seem to have coalesced, and became known as the Attecotti, a 
" fierce and warlike tribe," who gave the Romans a great deal of trouble. 
They afterwards appear in history as the Galloway Picts, and seem to have 
remained a distinct people under that name down to a comparatively recent 

The Gaelic Celts of the first migrations were in time followed by other 
bodies of their own tribesmen, and later by large incursions of invaders of 
a kindred race — the Cymric Celts. 7 The first comers, accordingly, seem to 
have been pushed on to the west and north, overrunning the west of Eng- 
land and Wales, entering Scotland, and some of them, more venturesome 
than others, crossing over into Northern Ireland, and making that country 
their own. 8 In the course of time, various tribes of the Cymric Celts ac- 
quired the most of Southern Britain and not a small portion of Scotland, 
spreading over the island in considerable numbers, and leaving few parts 
unoccupied save the hills and highlands of Scotland, which became the 
final retreat and stronghold of their Gaelic cousins." 

Caesar was the first observer who has left any record of these early Cym- 
ro-Celtic Britons. Of their origin and manner of living he speaks as fol- 
lows (£>e Bello Gallico, book v., ch. xii., xiv.) : 

The interior portion of Britain is inhabited by those of whom they say 
that it is handed down by tradition that they were born in the island itself ; 
the maritime portion by those who had passed over from the country of the 
Belgae for the purpose of plunder and making war ; almost all of whom are 
called by the names of those states from which being sprung they went 
thither, and having waged war, continued there and began to cultivate the 
lands. The number of the people is countless, and their buildings exceed- 
ingly numerous, for the most part very like those of the Gauls ; the number 
of cattle is great. They use either brass or iron rings, determined at a cer- 
tain weight, as their money. Tin is produced in the midland regions ; in the 
maritime, iron ; but the quantity of it is small ; they employ brass, which is 
imported. There, as in Gaul, is timber of every description except beech 
and fir. They do not regard it lawful to eat the hare, and the cock, and the 

The Caledonians, or Picts 185 

goose ; they, however, breed them for amusement and pleasure. The cli- 
mate is more temperate than in Gaul, the colds being less severe. 

The most civilized of all these nations are they who inhabit Kent, which 
is entirely a maritime district, nor do they differ much from the Gallic cus- 
toms. Most of the island inhabitants do not sow corn, but live on milk and 
flesh, and are clad with skins. All the Britons, indeed, dye themselves with 
woad, which occasions a bluish color, and thereby have a more terrible ap- 
pearance in fight. They wear their hair long, and have every part of their 
body shaved except their head and upper lip. Ten and even twelve have 
wives common to them, and particularly brothers among brothers, and par- 
ents among their children ; but if there be any issue by their wives, they are 
reputed to be the children of those by whom respectively each was first 
espoused when a virgin. 

A description of the several peoples inhabiting Britain at this time, or 
shortly after, is found in Ptolemy's Geography, written about a.d. 121. Ac- 
cording to Professor Rhys's interpretation of Ptolemy, most of the country 
between the Humber and Mersey and the Caledonian Forest belonged to a 
tribe or confederation known as the Brigantes. The Novantae and Selgovae, 
occupying the district on the Solway west of the Nith, appear, however, to 
have been independent of them ; as were also the Parisi, between the Humber 
and the Tees. The Otadini (occupying a portion of Lothian and the coast 
down to the southern Wall) and the northern Damnonii (inhabiting the dis- 
trict north of the Novantae, the Selgovae, and the Otadini, and to a consid- 
erable distance beyond the Forth and Clyde — the present counties of Ayr, 
Renfrew, Lanark, Dumbarton, Stirling, and the western half of Fife) were 
either distinct peoples subject to the Brigantes, or included in the tribes that 
went under that name. 10 

Aside from the Novantae and Selgovae, these various tribes are now gen- 
erally supposed to have belonged to the Cymric Celts, being part of the same 
people who, since the time of Julius Caesar, have been popularly known as 
" Britons," at the present day sometimes called " Brythons," to distinguish 
them from the "Goidels," or Gaelic Celts of Britain. Freeman includes with 
the Brythons nearly all the tribes of North Britain, a classification which 
seems entirely too comprehensive ; he says of the latter : 

On the whole, it is most likely that they belonged to the same branch of 
the Celtic race as the southern Britons, and that they differed from them 
chiefly as the unsubdued part of any race differs from the part which is 
brought into subjection. In the later days of the Roman power in Britain, 
these northern tribes, under the name of Picts, appear as dangerous invaders 
of the Roman province, invaders whose inroads were sometimes pushed 
even into its southern regions. 11 

The connection of these different divisions of the early races with our 
subject is quite important, for, as we shall see later on, that portion of Brit- 
ain inhabited for so long a time by the Novantae, the Selgovae, the Otadini, 
the Damnonii, the Brigantes, and the Galloway Picts of later writers is the 

1 86 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

part from which Ireland received the largest proportion of her Scottish 

Up to the close of the tenth century, the name " Scotland " was applied 
solely to the Hibernian island. The present Scotland was then known as 
Caledonia, or by its ancient Gaelic name of Alban, or Albania. Before that 
period, and, indeed, for some time afterwards, its boundaries did not extend 
south of the Forth and Clyde. That part of the country south of these 
estuaries was included in the Roman province, and its inhabitants for the 
most part were Romanized Britons. During their wars with the Brigantes in 
the first century, the Romans learned of a people to the north of that nation, 
whom they termed Caledonian Britons. Lucan first mentions them a.d. 65 : 
" Unda Caledonios fallit turbata Britannos." They are alluded to by Taci- 
tus some fifteen years later {Life of Agricola, c. xi.), who says : 

Who were the first inhabitants of Britain, whether indigenous or immi- 
grants, is a question involved in the obscurity usual among barbarians. 
Their temperament of body is various, whence deductions are formed of 
their different origin. Thus, the ruddy hair and large limbs of the Caledo- 
nians point out a German derivation. 13 The swarthy complexion and curled 
hair of the Silures, together with their situation opposite to Spain, render it 
probable that a colony of the ancient Iberi possessed themselves of that ter- 
ritory. They who are nearest Gaul resemble the inhabitants of that country; 
whether from the duration of hereditary influence, or whether it be that 
when lands jut forward in opposite directions, climate gives the same condi- 
tion of body to the inhabitants of both. On a general survey, however, it 
appears probable that the Gauls originally took possession on the neighbor- 
ing coast. The sacred rites and superstitions of these people are discernible 
among the Britons. The languages of the two nations do not greatly differ. 
The same audacity in provoking danger, and irresolution in facing it when 
present, is observable in both. The Britons, however, display more ferocity, 
not being yet softened by a long peace ; for it appears from history that the 
Gauls were once renowned in war, till, losing their valor with their liberty, 
languor and indolence entered among them. The same change has also 
taken place among those of the Britons who have been long subdued ; but 
the rest continue such as the Gauls formerly were. 

Tacitus's account of the campaigns carried on against the Caledonians by 
Agricola sufficiently illustrates the spirit and valor of these early Scotch- 
men. Though often defeated in battle, they were never subdued ; and when 
unable to withstand the charges of the Roman legions in the open, they fell 
back to their retreats in forest and mountains, where they were able to hold 
the Romans at bay. 

Dion Cassius, the historian (about a.d. 155-230), brings them to our at- 
tention again, when in the year 201 we find the Caledonians joined with the 
Maeatae in preparation for an attack on the Roman province. This was 
postponed, however, by the action of the Roman Governor, Virius Lupus, 
who purchased peace at a great price from the Maeatae. Dion, writing before 
the year 230, gives the following description of these Maeatae, which, while in 
some respects evidently founded upon fable, yet as a whole corresponds 

The Caledonians, or Picts 187 

with like accounts which have come down to us of the neighboring tribes 

(1. lxxvi., ch. xii.) : 

Of the Britons, the two most ample nations are the Caledonians and 
the Maeatae ; for the names of the rest refer for the most part to these. The 
Maeatae inhabit near the very wall which divides the island in two parts ; the 
Caledonians are after those. Each of them inhabits mountains, very rugged, 
and wanting water, also desert fields full of marshes ; they have neither 
castles nor cities, nor dwell in any ; they live on milk, and by hunting, and 
maintain themselves by the fruits of trees : for fishes, of which there is a very 
great and numberless quantity, they never taste ; they dwell naked in tents, 
and without shoes ; they use wives in common, and whatever is born to them 
they bring up. 14 In the popular state they are governed as for the most part ; 
they rob on the highway most willingly ; they war in chariots ; horses they 
have, small and fleet ; their infantry, also, are as well most swift at running 
as most brave in pitched battle. Their arms are a shield and a short spear, 
in the upper part whereof is an apple of brass, that while it is shaken it may 
terrify the enemies with sound ; they have likewise daggers ; they are able 
to bear hunger, cold, and all afflictions ; for they merge themselves in 
marshes, and there remain many days having only their heads out of water ; 
and in woods are nourished by the barks and roots of trees. But a certain 
kind of food they prepare for all occasions, of which if they take as much 
as the size of a single bean, they are in nowise ever wont to hunger or thirst. 

The nation of the Maeatae {i.e., " Men of the Midlands ") embraced those 
tribes immediately north of the Roman wall between the Forth and the 
Clyde, while the Caledonians were to the north and east. This division of 
the people into two nations or septs seems to have continued for some cen- 
turies. In 380, they were known as the Dicalidones and the Vecturiones. 
By Bede they appear to have been distinguished as the Northern Picts and 
the Southern Picts. 16 

In the year 208, Severus penetrated into their country as far as the 
river Tay. By great exertions in clearing the country of forests and under- 
growth, and the construction of roads and bridges, he acquired a limited 
district beyond that Wall of Antoninus which he had reconstructed between 
the Clyde and the Forth. This territory the Romans afterwards garrisoned, 
and retained for a few years. Severus is said to have fought no battles, 
on this march, but his loss in men was very great, owing to the destructive 
guerilla warfare carried on by the natives during the progress of the work 
of clearing. In 211, the Maeatae and Caledonians prepared again for an 
attack on the Romans. The death of Severus in that year preventing his 
conduct of the operations against them, his son and successor was forced to 
make peace with these tribes on terms which it would seem eventually in- 
volved the withdrawal of the Roman garrisons to the south of the Wall. 

After this we learn nothing more of the Caledonians from the Roman 
writers until near the beginning of the following century, when they are 
brought to our attention again under a new name, and one by which the 
early inhabitants of Scotland have become best known in history. Eumenius, 
the panegyrist, in his oration to Constantius Chlorus delivered at Autun, in 

1 88 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

Gaul, a.d. 296, on the occasion of the victory of the latter over Allectus, 
compares the victor with the former leaders who had fought against the 
Britons, and adds : " The nation Caesar attacked was then rude, and the 
Britons, used only to the Picts and Hibernians, — enemies then half naked, — 
easily yielded to the Roman arms and ensigns." At the same place some 
years later (309-10) Eumenius pronounced a second panegyric on Constan- 
tius Chlorus, before Constantine, the son of Constantius, in which he said : 
" The day would fail sooner than my oration were I to run over all the actions 
of thy father, even with this brevity. His last expedition did not seek for 
British trophies (as is vulgarly believed), but, the gods now calling him, he 
came to the secret bounds of the earth. For neither did he by so many and 
such actions, I do not say the woods and marshes of the Caledonians and other 
Picts, but not Hibernia [Scotland ?], near at hand, nor farthest Thule," etc. 

These, and similar brief allusions on the part of later writers, are all 
that we get from the pages of early history concerning a subject which, 
towards the close of the last century, gave rise to the famous Pictish Contro- 
versy, a dispute that was carried on in Scotland for many years, and with 
extreme bitterness on both sides, but which did not result in adding much 
information to that imparted by Eumenius in the passage quoted above : 
namely, that the Caledonians were Picts. 16 For a full consideration of 
these discussions, the reader is referred to the works of Pinkerton, Ritson, 
Chalmers, Prichard, Grant, Betham, and others. While we cannot but agree 
with Mr. Hill Burton in concluding that the labor of those writers has been 
without avail, and are entirely willing to " content ourselves with the old 
and rather obvious notion that by Picti the Romans merely meant painted 
people, 17 without any consideration about their race, language, or other 
ethnical specialties," yet the efforts of our modern workers in the same field 
have been more fruitful of results, so far as the ethnology of these painted 
people is concerned. It is now generally believed that they were primarily 
descended from the aborigines of Britain, who were non-Celtic and non- 
Aryan. Later, in accordance with the usually adopted view as to the priority 
of the Gaelic emigration to Britain, its subsequent movement northward, and 
the facility with which the Picts afterwards coalesced with the Scots, they 
must also have become to a large extent Gaelic. Yet, the presence of known 
Cymric peoples in the Pictish territories in Roman times, — one instance 
being that of the northern Damnonii, who were cut off from their own nation 
by the building of the first Wall, — together with the many proofs of Brythonic 
occupation shown in the topographical nomenclature of the northern Low- 
lands, lead us to the conclusion that, so far as the Southern Picts were con- 
cerned, their peculiar characteristics had to a considerable extent been 
modified by the infusion of Cymric elements. In other words, the Northern 
Picts seem to have been largely of the aboriginal type, more or less modified 
by fusion with the Gaelic, while those of the south were a mixed Gaelic, 
Cymric, and aboriginal people. This view harmonizes with the distinction 

The Caledonians, or Picts 189 

nearly always made by the early historians in their references to the inhabi- 
tants of Caledonia — as instanced by the Maeatae and Caledonians of Dion 
Cassius, the Caledonians and " other Picts " of Eumenius, the Dicalidones 
and Vecturiones of Ammianus, and, somewhat later, the Northern and 
Southern Picts of Bede. 18 

The Picts were converted to Christianity by the preaching of St. Columba 
in the latter half of the sixth century (after a.d. 565) ; and they were ruled 
over by a line of Pictish kings down to the year 842, when Kenneth MacAlpin, 
king of the Dalriada Scots, brought them under subjection, and united the 
two kingdoms under one crown. 

The chief original sources of information about the Pictish kingdom and 
its rulers are the Ulster Annals, the Annals of Tighernac, and the Pictish 
Chronicle, of which the best editions are those contained in Mr. William F. 
Skene's Chronicles of the Picts and Scots. English translations of portions 
of the first two of these have been printed in the Collectanea de Rebus 
Albanicis of the Iona Club (see Appendix O). 

The names of the Pictish kings from the beginning of the fifth century, 
with the dates of the commencement of their reigns, duration of same, and 
dates of death, are as follows : 

About a.d. 406, Drust (or Drest) I., son of Irb (or Erp, or Wirp). 

451, Talore I., son of Aniel, reigned four years. 

455-57, Nechtan I., surnamedMorbet, son of Irb (or Erp); reigned twenty- 
four years. 

480, Drest (or Drust) II., surnamed Gurthinmoch ; reigned thirty 

510, Galanau ; reigned twelve years. 

522, Dadrest ; reigned one year. 

523, Drest (or Drust) III., son of Gyrom ; reigned eleven years. 

524, the same, with Drust IV., son of Udrust (or Wdrost). 19 
529, Drust III. (alone). 

534, Gartnaoch I., son of Gyrom ; reigned seven years. 

541, Giltram (or Cailtram), son of Gyrom ; reigned one year. 

542, Talorg II., son of Muircholaich ; reigned eleven years. 

553, Drest V., son of Munait ; reigned one year. 

554, Galam,* son of Cendaeladh ; reigned two years ; died (probably) 580. 

555, the same, with Bridei. 

556, Bridei (or Bruidi, or Brudei, or Brude) I., son of Mailcon (Bruidi 
mac Mailochon) ; reigned thirty years ; died 583. 

586, Gartnard (or Gartnaidh) II., son of Domelch (or Domlech or Don- 
ald) (Gartnay mac Donald) ; reigned eleven years ; died 599. 

597, Nechtan II., grandson (or nephew) of Uerd (Nechtan Hy Firb) ; 
reigned twenty years. 

612 (or 617), Cinioch (or Cinaeth, or Kenneth, or Cinadon), son of 
Luchtren (or Lachtren) ; reigned fourteen to nineteen years ; died 631. 

190 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

631, Gartnard (or Gartnaidh) III., son of Wid (or Foith) (Gartnay 
macFoith) ; reigned four years ; died 635. 

635, Breidei (or Bruidi) II., son of Wid (or Foith) (Bruidi mac Foith) ; 
reigned five years ; died 641. 

641, Talorc (or Talore, or Talorcan) III., son of Wid (or Foith) (Talor- 
can mac Foith) ; reigned twelve years ; died 653. 

653, Talorcan, son of Ainfrait (or Anfrith, 21 or Eanfred) ; reigned four 
years ; died 657. 

657-63, Gartnait (or Gartnaidh) IV., son of Donnell (or Domhnaill) 
(Gartnay mac Donald) ; reigned six and a half years ; died 66^. 

665, Drest (or Drust, or Drost) VI., son of Donnell and brother of 
Gartnach (Drust mac Donald) ; reigned seven years ; expelled 672. 

672, Bredei (or Bruidi, or Bruidhe," or Bredei) III., son of Bili (or Bile 
or Beli) (Bruidi mac Bili) ; reigned twenty-one years ; died 693. 

693, Taran (or Gharan), son of Entefedich (or Enfisedech) (Gharan 
mac Enfisedech) ; reigned four years ; expelled 697. 

695-7, Brudei (or Bredei, or Bruidi, or Brude) IV., son of Derili (or 
Derelei) (Brudei mac Derili) ; reigned eleven years ; died 706. 

709, Nechtan III., son of Derili ; reigned fifteen years ; resigned 724 ; 
returned 728 ; died 729. 

724, Drest (or Druxst or Drost) VII.; expelled 726; died, 729. 

726, Alpin, son of Eachaidh ; expelled 728 ; died 741. 

729-31, Angus (or Hungus) I., son of Fergus (or Wirgust) ; reigned 
thirty years ; died 761. 

761, Brudei (or Bruidi) V., son of Fergus ; reigned two years ; died 


763, Kenneth (or Cinaedh, or Ciniod), son of Feredach (or Wirdech, or 
Wredech) ; reigned twelve years ; died 775. 

775, Alpin, son of Wroid ; reigned three years ; died 780. 

777-8, Drust (or Drost), son of Talorgen (or Talorcan) ; reigned four to 
five years ; and Talorgan (or Talorcan), son of Angus ; reigned two and 
a half years ; died about 782. 

784, Conall, son of Taidg (or Canaul, son of Tarl'a) ; reigned five years ; 
expelled 789-90. 

790, Constantine, son of Fergus (or Wirgust) ; reigned thirty years ; died 

820, Angus (brother of Constantine), son of Fergus ; reigned twelve 
years ; died 834. 

834, Drust (or Drost), son of Constantine, and Talorcan (or Talorgan), 
son of Uitholl (or Wthoil) ; reigned about three years. 

836, Eoganan, son of Angus ; reigned three years ; died 839. 

839, Wrad (or Fered), son of Bargoit ; reigned about three years. 

842, Bred (or Bruidi), son of Ferat ; reigned one year. 

842-4, Kenneth II., surnamed mac Alpin, King of Albany. 

The Caledonians, or Picts 191 


1 One of the most useful books on this subject is Dr. Daniel Wilson's Prehistoric Annals 
of Scotland. 

'Charles I. Elton, Origins of English History \ London, 1890. 

8 Dr. Thurnam was the first to recognise that the long skulls, out of the long barrows of 
Britain and Ireland, were of the Basque or Iberian type, and Professor Huxley holds that 
the river-bed skulls belong to the same race. We have therefore proofs that an Iberian or 
Basque population spread over the whole of Britain and Ireland in the neolithic age, inhabit- 
ing caves, and burying their dead in caves and chambered tombs, just as in the Iberian 
peninsula also, in the neolithic age. — Cave Hunting, p. 214, by W. Boyd Dawkins, M.A., 1874. 

4 " The site of the prehistoric Celtic village near Glastonbury has been further excavated 
since July last under the superintendence of the discoverer, Arthur Bullied. The sites of the 
dwellings are marked by mounds. One of these contained the greatest depth of clay yet 
found, no less than nine feet, the accumulation of successive hearths, which were found 
necessary as the weight of the clay gradually compressed the peat beneath. This mound 
contained three hundred tons of clay, all of which must have been brought in their boats by 
the inhabitants from the neighboring hills. Under the mound was found the framework of 
a loom with brushwood and wattlework to form the foundation. That the inhabitants were 
much engaged in spinning is clear from the fact that in addition to other things connected 
with the craft no fewer than forty horn and bone carding combs have been unearthed* 
Strangely enough, no two of these are exactly of the same pattern. As in previous 
seasons, a large number of bone articles has been discovered. The number of broken bone 
needles and splinters of bone found in one mound seems to indicate that it was utilized as a 
needle factory. 

' ' Another mound was very rich in fragments of pottery and other evidences of the 
manufacture of hardware. No fewer than ten bronze fibulae were found, these being 
fashioned almost exactly like the modern safety-pin. Two bronze studs, probably a part of 
harness or for fastening clothing, were also found, together with other small bronze articles. 
A neatly cut iron file about eight inches long was found. As usual, very few human re- 
mains were discovered, part of the skeleton of a very young child being all that was brought 
to light this summer. With the exception of the cracked skulls of a few unfortunate warriors, 
the remains of very young children have chiefly been found in past years, Mr. Bullied being 
of the opinion that these primitive people conveyed their dead to the neighboring hills for 

" Parts of three broken millstones were unearthed and in one mound a clay oven, measur- 
ing two feet by nine inches. One glass article only was brought to light this year, a blue 
glass bead with a wavy line of dark blue running around it." — London Times, circa 
January, 1898. 

6 As for Britain, one of the most thoroughly non-Celtic portions of it south of the Clyde 
was probably that of the Selgovae or hunters, in Roman times, and later the more limited 
Pictish district beyond the Nith. — J. Rhys, Celtic Britain, p. 270. 

6 The name of the Nith in Ptolemy's time was Novios, and it is from it that this people 
got the name of Novantae, given them probably by Brythons. ... To the east and 
northeast of the Novantae dwelt the Selgovae, protected by thick forests and a difficult 
country. They have left their name in the modern form of Solway to the moss and to the 
firth called after them. The word probably meant hunters, and the people to whom it 
applied may be supposed, not only to have been no Brythons, but to have been to no very 
great extent Celtic at all, except perhaps as to their language, which they may have adopted 
at an early date from the Goidelic invaders ; in a great measure they were most likely a 
remnant of the aboriginal inhabitants, and the same remark may be supposed to be equally 
applicable to the Novantae. . . . They lived between the Walls, and appeared in history 

19 2 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

as Genunians, we think, and Attecotti. . . . The struggle in which they took part 
against the Romans ended in their ultimately retaining only the country behind the Nith, 
where the name of the Novantae becomes in Bede's mouth, that of the Niduarian Picts, 
known as the Picts of Galloway for centuries afterwards. — Celtic Britain, pp. 220-221. 

The name " Picti " was likewise applied to the inhabitants of Galloway, comprising the 
modern counties of Kirkcudbright and Wigton, till a still later period, and survived the entire 
disappearance of the name as applied to any other portion of the inhabitants of Scotland, 
even as late as the twelfth century. This district was occupied in the second century by the 
tribe termed by Ptolemy the " Novantae," with their towns of Rerigonium and Lucopibia, 
and there is nothing to show that the same people did not occupy it throughout, and become 
known as the Picts of Galloway, of which " Candida Casa," or Withern, was the chief seat, 
and occupied the site of the older Lucopibia. — Celtic Scotland, vol. i., p. 131. 

The Picts of Galloway are occasionally confounded with or included amongst the 
Southern Picts, though when Bede describes the latter people as dwellers beyond the Forth, 
at the foot of the lofty range of mountains separating them from the northern division of their 
race, he places them in a very different part of the country from Galloway. Ritson maintains 
that Galloway was a province of the Southern Picts, laying it down, in his dogmatic manner, 
" as an incontrovertible fact, for which we have the express authority of Bede." In support 
of this assertion he quotes Bede, Hist. Eccl., 1. iv., ch. xxvi., which, unfortunately for his argu- 
ment, proves exactly the contrary, as the seat of Trumwine's bishopric is there said to have 
been placed at Abercorn on the Forth, which divides the territories of the Picts and the 
Angles — a very long way from Galloway. Bede was very well acquainted with this latter 
district under the name of the diocese of Candida Casa, as it belonged, when he wrote, to the 
kingdom of Northumbria ; and in his last chapter he commemorates the establishment of an 
Anglian bishop within its boundaries. As he distinctly says that the Picts, after their 
victory at Nectan's Mere, recovered from the Angles all that they had previously lost, it is 
plain that the diocese of Candida Casa, which remained in possession of the Northumbrians, 
could not have belonged to the Picts, but must have been conquered from another race, the 
Britons. The authority of Bede is quite sufficient to refute the account of Jocelin, a monk 
who in the twelfth century ascribed the conversion of the Picts of Galloway to a certain 
shadowy St. Kentigern in the seventh ; this very district having been, upwards of two centuries 
before, the seat of a Christian bishop, the British Ninian. A still more apocryphal story 
occurs in the Acta Sanctorum (nth March), that St. Constantine of Cornwall (the contem- 
porary of Gildas) was martyred in Kintyre about the year 570, when preaching to the heathen 
Galwegians and pagan Scots ; or exactly at the same time when Columba was converting the 
Northern Picts from his asylum of Iona, which he received from the Christian King of the 
Dalriads. Another argument has been brought forward to place the Picts in Galloway in 
the days of Bede, because the venerable historian has said that St. Cuthbert, on an excursion 
from Melrose, was driven by stress of weather to the territory of the Picts called Niduari — 
44 ad terram Pictorum qui Niduari vocantur." 44 The Picts inhabiting the banks of the Nith 
in Dumfriesshire," say Smith and Pinkerton, 4< whither the holy man could not have gone in 
a boat," retorts Ritson — with much truth — suggesting in his turn Long Niddry in Linlithgow- 
shire, to reach which place, however, the holy man's boat must have been driven by stress of 
weather across a considerable tract of dry land. The explanation of the difficulty seems to 
be that Cuthbert, sailing from some point on the eastern coast, was driven northwards by 
contrary winds into the Firth of Tay, landing near Abernethy on the coast of Fife, the 
inhabitants of the banks of the Nethy probably being the 44 Picti qui Niduari vocantur". — 
Scotland under her Early Kings, vol. ii., p. 382. See Note 12, p. 214. 

1 As early as the middle of the fourth century the British provinces were already persis- 
tently attacked by sea and land. The Picts and Scots, and the warlike nation of the 
44 Attecotti," from whom the Empire was accustomed to recruit its choicest soldiers, the fleets 
of Irish pirates in the north, the Franks and Saxons on the southern shores, combined to- 

The Caledonians, or Picts 193 

gether, whenever a chance presented itself, to burn and devastate the country, to cut off an 
outlying garrison, to carry off women and children like cattle captured in a foray, and to offer 
the bodies of Roman citizens as sacrifices. . . . The " Notitia Dignitatum " [compiled 
about a.d. 400] mentions several regiments of Attecotti serving for the most part in Gaul 
and Spain. Two of their regiments were enrolled among the " Honorians," the most distin- 
guished troops in the Imperial armies. Though their country is not certainly known, it 
seems probable that they inhabited the wilder parts of Galloway. — Elton, Origins of English 
History, p. 338. After the building of the Roman wall by which those south of it were 
severed from their kinsmen north of it the former probably soon lost their national character- 
istics and became Brythonicized, while the Selgovae remained to form, with the Novantae, 
the formidable people of the Attecotti, who afterwards gave Roman Britain so much to do, 
until their power was broken by Theodosius, who enrolled their able-bodied men in the Roman 
army, and sent them away to the continent, where no less than four distinct bodies of them 
served at the time when the Table of Dignities was drawn up. They were a fierce and war- 
like people, but by the end of the Roman occupation they seem to have been subdued or 
driven beyond the Nith: . . . here the language of the inhabitants down to the 
sixteenth century was Goidelic. — Celtic Britain, pp. 233-234. 

Upon the whole it seems highly probable — and these Gaulish inscriptions add to the weight 
of probability — that the Galli of Caesar were in the same line of Celtic descent with the Irish, 
and that the name is preserved to this day in Gadhel and Gael, and commemorated also in 
the triad Galedin, Celyddon, and Gwyddyl, as well as in Caledonia, Galatas, Keltai, and 
Celtae. It is also nearly certain that these Galli or Gaels were the first to colonize Britain, 
and probably that they were the first to colonize Gaul, and that in both cases they were 
closely followed by a people of the same original stock and using a similar language, called 
Cymry, Cimri, and in earlier times Kimmerioi, Cimmerii. — Thomas Nicholas, Pedigree of the 
English People, p. 43. 

There also cannot be a doubt that the statement which eminent writers have handed 
down is virtually correct, that the Goidels or Gaels were the first Celtic inhabitants, who 
absorbed the aborigines as the situations or circumstances demanded, and who in turn were 
next dislodged by the Cymri, and other Celtic fresh hordes who flocked into Britain, driving 
the said Goidels northwards, and across to Ireland. If other proof were wanting, we have 
it in the surnames, and the names of places, many of which are common to both Galloway 
and Ireland, being found on both sides of the Channel. It is also not to be forgotten that, as 
Roger de Hovedon relates, the Galwegians, at the battle of the Standard in a.d. 1138, used 
the war-cry " Albanach ! Albanach ! " thus identifying themselves as Irish-Scots ; for to the 
present time the Irish call the people of Scotland Albanach and Albanaigh. It also ex- 
tends further, for as Irish-Scots its use implied that they considered they had returned to 
the land of their fathers, and were entitled to be Scotsmen, which is the Gaelic meaning of 
the word. Hovedon, having lived at the time, is thus contemporary evidence and it is 
related that he was sent on a mission to Scotland. — MacKerlie, Galloway, Ancient and 
Modern, p. 62. 

8 " That this is so may be inferred with a reasonable degree of certainty from the inaug- 
uration and progress of the English conquest of a later age, which, beginning at nearly the 
same point on the eastern coast that Caesar had found most convenient to reach from Gaul, 
gradually extended westward and northward, driving the Celts before until they reached the 
western shore. 

" The early separation of these pioneers of the Gaelic race through their crossing into 
Ireland, whether from Scotland or Wales, is quite sufficient to account for the marked differ- 
ence now existing between the Gaelic, or Irish, language and the Welsh."— Nicholas, Pedigree 
of the English People, London, 1873, p. 46. 

Diodorus Siculus, a contemporary of Caesar, states that Ireland was inhabited by 
44 Britains." Camden thinks they first emigrated from Galloway. Spain was at least five 

194 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

hundred miles distant ; and the nearest promontory of Gaul lay about three hundred miles 
from the shores of Ireland. 

* Professor Rhys, in his latest work ( The Welsh People, New York and London, 1900, 
written in collaboration with Dr. David Brynmor-Jones), has applied the name " Goidelo- 
Celtic," or "Celtican," to the language of the Gaelic Celts, and " Galato-Celtic," or " Ga- 
latic," to that of the Brythonic Celts. On this subject, he says : 

" The ancient distinction of speech between the Celts implies a corresponding difference 
of race and institutions, a difference existing indeed long before Celts of any description came 
to these islands. . . . The two peoples are found to have differed largely in their manner 
of disposing of their dead, and each had weapons characteristic of its own civilization. The 
interments with the most important remains of the older stock are found mostly in the neigh- 
borhood of the Alps, including the upper portions of the basin of the Danube and the plains 
of North Italy (see Bertrad and Reinach's volume on Les Celles dans les Vallees du Po et du 
Danube, Paris, 1894). This older Celtic world began, about the sixth century B.C., to be in- 
vaded by the Galatic Celts, whose home may be inferred to have consisted of Central and 
Northern Germany and of Belgium ; and the remains of these Galatic Celts are to be studied 
in the great burial places between the Seine, the Marne, and the Rhine — in the country, in 
short, from which they invaded Britain. It has been surmised that this movement was begun 
by the Brythons between the time of Pytheas, in the fourth century B.C., and the visits of 
Julius Caesar. The latter mentions, (ii., 4.) a certain Diviciacos, king of the Suessiones, a 
Belgic people which has left its name to Soissons, as the most powerful prince in Gaul, and 
as ruling also over Britain. This was, moreover, late enough to be within the memory of 
men living in Caesar's time. . . . 

" When, it may be asked, did the other Celts, the Goidels, whom the Brythons found 
here, arrive in this country ? It is impossible to give any precise answer to such a question, 
but it may be supposed that the Goidels came over not later than the great movements which 
took place in the Celtic world of the Continent in the fifth and sixth centuries before our era 
(see the Premiers Habitants de l* Europe, vol. i., p. 262, and Zimmer's Mutterrecht der Pikten 
in the Zeitschrift fur Rechtsgeschichte, vol. xv., pp. 233, 234). We mean the movements 
which resulted in the Celts reaching the Mediterranean and penetrating into Spain, while 
others of the same family began to press towards the east of Europe, whence some of them 
eventually crossed to Asia Minor and made themselves a home in the country called after 
them Galatia. On the whole, we dare not suppose the Goidels to have come to Britain much 
later than the sixth century B.C. ; . . . rather should we say that they probably began to 
arrive in this country earlier. Before the Brythons came the Goidels had presumably oc- 
cupied most of the island south of the firths of the Clyde and Forth. So when the Brythons 
arrived and began to press the Goidels in the west, some of the latter may have crossed to 
Ireland ; possibly they had begun still earlier to settle there. The portion of Ireland which 
they first occupied was probably the tract known as the kingdom of Meath, approximately 
represented now by the diocese of that name ; but settlements may have also been made by 
them at other points on the coast. 

' ' We have next to consider the question whether the first Celtic comers, the Goidels, 
were also the first inhabitants of this country. This may be briefly answered to the effect 
that there seems to be no reason to think so, or even to suppose that it may not have been 
uninterruptedly inhabited for a time before it ceased to form a continuous portion of the con- 
tinent of Europe. . . . It is but natural to suppose that the Goidels, when they arrived, 
subjugated the natives, and made slaves of them and drudges. From the first the fusion of the 
two races may have begun to take place. . . . The process of fusion must have been quick- 
ened by the advent of a third and hostile element, the Brythonic . . . and under the pres- 
sure exerted by the Brythons the fusion of the two other nations may have been so complete 
as to produce a new people of mixed Goidelic and native origin. . . . Accordingly, sup- 
posing the Aborigines not to have been Aryans, one might expect the language of the resultant 

The Caledonians, or Picts 195 

Goidelic people to show more non-Aryan traits than the language of the Brythons ; as a 
matter of fact, this proves to be the case." 

10 The southern Damnonii, inhabiting as they did what was later the nucleus of the 
kingdom of the Cumbrians, must undoubtedly be regarded as their ancestors and as Brythons. 
So were the Otadini Brythons . . . they disappeared early, their country having been seized 
in part by the Picts from the other side of the Forth, and in part by Germanic invaders from 
beyond the sea. — Celtic Britain, p. 271. 

Over the ethnography of Selgovae and Novantse much controversy has taken place. It 
is probable that on the shores of Solway, as in the rest of the British Isles, there was at one 
time an aboriginal race, small and dark-haired, which early Greek writers describe as being 
replaced by the large-limbed, fairer-skinned Celts. The early Irish historical legends contain 
numerous allusions to this people, generally known as Firbolg. But as it cannot be affirmed 
that any trace of these has been identified, either in the traditions or sepulchral remains of 
this particular district, further speculation about them is for the present futile. The fairest 
inference from the majority of place-names in Novantia — now Galloway — as well as from 
the oldest recorded personal names, is that it was long inhabited by people of the Goidelic or 
Gaelic branch of Celts, speaking the same language, no doubt with some dialectic variation, as 
the natives of Ireland and the rest of what is now Scotland. The Cymric or Welsh speech, 
which was afterwards diffused among the Britons of Dumfriesshire and Strathclyde, did not 
prevail to dislodge innumerable place-names in the Goidelic language which still remain 
within the territory of the Strathclyde Britons. That the people who dwelt longest in Gallo- 
way spoke neither the Welsh form of Celtic nor the Pictish dialect of Gaelic, may be inferred 
from the absence of any certain traces of either of these languages among their names of 
places. Yet, as will be shown hereafter, they bore the name of Picts long after it had fallen 
into disuse in other parts of Scotland. They were Picts, yet not the same as Northern Picts 
dwelling beyond the Mounth, nor as the Southern Picts, dwelling between the Mounth and 
the Forth ; Gaels, yet not of one brotherhood with other Gaels — a distinction emphasized by 
the name given to them of Gallgaidhel or stranger Gaels. This term became in the Welsh 
speech Gallwyddel {dd sounds like th in "this"), whence the name Galloway, which still 
denotes the Stewartry of Kirkcudbright and the shire or county of Wigtown. Reginald of 
Durham, writing in the twelfth century, has preserved one word of Galloway Pictish. He 
says that certain clerics of Kirkcudbright were called scollofthes in the language of the Picts. 
This is a rendering of the Latin scolasticus, differing not greatly from the Erse and Gaelic scolog, 
more widely from the Welsh yscolAeie. — Maxwell, History of Dumfries and Galloway, pp. 4, 5. 

11 " One may say that the Welsh people of the present day is made up of three elements : 
the Aboriginal, the Goidelic, and the Brythonic. And it would be unsafe to assume that 
the later elements predominate ; for the Celtic invaders, both Goidels and Brythons, may 
have come in comparatively small numbers, not to mention the fact that the aboriginal race, 
having been here possibly thousands of years before the first Aryan arrived, may have had 
such an advantage in the matter of acclimatization, that it alone survives in force. This is 
now supposed to be the case with France, whose people, taken in the bulk, are neither 
Frankish nor Celtic so much as the representatives of the non-Aryan populations which the 
first Aryans found there. It thus becomes a matter of interest for us to know all we can 
about the earliest inhabitants of this country. Now, the question of the origin of that race 
is, according to one view taken of it, inseparably connected with the Pictish question ; and 
the most tenable hypothesis may be said to be, that the Picts were non-Aryans, whom the 
first Celtic migrations found already settled here. The Picts appear to have retained their 
language and institutions latest on the east coast of Scotland in portions of the region be- 
tween Clackmannan and Banff. But Irish literature alludes to Picts here and there in Ireland, 
and that in such a way as to favor the belief that they were survivals of a race holding pos- 
session at one time of the whole country. If the Picts were not Aryans, we could hardly 
suppose them to have been able to acquire possession of extensive tracts of these islands after 

196 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

the arrival of such a powerful and warlike race as the early Aryans. The natural conclusion 
is, that the Picts were here before the Aryans came, that they were, in fact, the aborigines. 

"Now, something is known of the manners and customs of the ancient Picts ; for one 
of them at least was so remarkable as to attract the attention of the ancient authors who 
mention the peoples of this country. It was the absence among them of the institution of 
marriage as known to men of the Aryan race. This is illustrated by the history of the Picts 
in later times, especially in the case of their kings, for it is well known that a Pictish king 
could not be succeeded by a son of his own, but usually by a sister's son. The succession 
was through the mother, and it points back to a state of society which, previous to the con- 
version of the Picts to Christianity, was probably based on matriarchy as distinguished from 
marriage and marital authority. . . . 

" The same conclusion as to the probable non- Aryan origin of the Picts is warranted by 
facts of another order, namely, those of speech ; but the Pictish question is rendered philo- 
logically difficult by the scantiness of the remains of the Pictish language. . . . Failing 
to recognize the borrowing of Goidelic and Brythonic words by the Picts, some have been led 
to regard Pictish as a kind of Gaelic, and some as a dialect akin to Welsh. The point to 
have been decided, however, was not whether Gaelic or Welsh explains certain words said to 
have been in use among the Picts, but whether there does not remain a residue to which 
neither Gaelic nor Welsh, nor, indeed, any Aryan tongue whatsoever, can supply any sort of 
key. This is beginning of late to be perceived. . . . It is not too much to say that the 
theory of the non- Aryan origin of the Pictish language holds the field at present." — Rhys, 
The Welsh People, pp. 13-16. 

12 Some information in regard to the early inhabitants of the district west of the Nith may 
be found in the works of Mr. P. H. MacKerlie, chief of which is Lands and their Owners in 
Galloway, In speaking of the language, he says : " It is also found that the Lowland Scottish 
was not derived from the Saxon, from which it differs in many respects, but appears to have 
had its origin from the language of the Northern Picts and Norwegian settlers. It is true 
that there are no means of distinctly tracing this ; but the belief of some writers that the 
Picts were originally Britons, and became mixed with Norse blood, is more than probable. 
The Pictish language, so far known as Celtic, is considered as having been nearer to the dia- 
lects of the Britons than to those of the Gael, which coincides with the above account of their 
origin — hence the characteristics of both, blended with the Goidel or Gaelic, to be found in 
the Scots. There can be little doubt that the Scottish language had its foundation principally 
from these sources. Chalmers gives many Scottish words as decidedly British or Cymric. 
In addition there are many Goidelic or Gaelic words, as can be traced by any one possessed 
of Gaelic and Scottish dictionaries. It is historical that in the eleventh century Gaelic was 
in use at the Court of Malcolm Canmore, and also in the Church at that period. This 
continued until Edgar succeeded as king in 1098, when Norman French (not Saxon) dis- 
placed the Gaelic at Court." — Galloway, Ancient and Modern, p. 79. 

Mr. MacKerlie's work is chiefly valuable for its local features, and he cannot be too closely 
followed in his general conclusions. His statement as to the origin of the Scottish language 
must be taken with considerable allowance. Mr. Hill Burton, however, takes an equally 
extreme position on the other side of the question. In speaking of the Lowlanders, he says : 
" How far Celtic blood may have mingled with their race we cannot tell, but it was the 
nature of their language obstinately to resist all admixture with the Gaelic. The broadest 
and purest Lowland Scotch is spoken on the edge of the Highland line. It ought, one would 
think, to be a curious and instructive topic for philology to deal with, that while the estab- 
lished language of our country — of England and Scotland — borrows at all hands — from 
Greek, from Latin, from French, — it takes nothing whatever, either in its structure or 
vocabulary, from the Celtic race, who have lived for centuries in the same island with the 
Saxon-speaking races, English and Scots." — History of Scotland, vol. i., p. 200. 

13 In elucidation of this passage no less reputable an authority than Thomas H. Huxley 

The Caledonians, or Picts 197 

is named by Mr. Skene as sponsor for his proposition that " the people termed Gauls and 
those called Germans by the Romans did not differ in any important physical character." 
This, indeed, coincides with the usual description given by the Romans. 

14 This subject has been discussed in connection with the succession of the Pictish kings. 
The names of the reigning kings are in the main confined to four or five names, as Brude, 
Drust, Talorgan, Nechtan, Gartnaidh, and these never appear among the names of the fathers 
of kings, nor does the name of a father occur twice in the list. Further, in two cases we 
know that while the kings who reigned were termed respectively Brude and Talorcan, the 
father of the one was a Briton, and of the other an Angle. The conclusion which Mr. Mc- 
Lennan in his very original work on primitive marriage draws from this is, that it raises a 
strong presumption that all the fathers were men of other tribes. At any rate, there remains 
the fact, after every deduction has been made, that the fathers and mothers were in no case 
of the same family name ; and he quotes this as a reason for believing that exogamy prevailed 
among the Picts. But this explanation, though it goes some way, will not fully interpret the 
anomalies in the list of Pictish kings. The only hypothesis that seems to afford a full expla- 
nation is one that would suppose that the kings among the Picts were elected from one family, 
clan, or tribe, or possibly from one in each of the two divisions of the Northern and Southern 
Picts ; that there lingered among the Picts the old custom among the Celts, who, to use the 
language of Mr. McLennan, " were anciently lax in their morals, and recognized relationship 
through mothers only ; that intermarriage was not permitted in this royal family tribe, and 
the women had to obtain their husbands from the men of other tribes, not excluding those of 
a different race ; that the children were adopted into the tribe of the mother, and certain 
names were exclusively bestowed on such children." — Celtic Scotland, vol. i., pp. 233-234 ; 
John F. McLennan, Origin of the Form of Capture in Marriage Ceremonies. 

15 These Britons, known by the name of Maeatae, included under them several lesser 
people, such as the Otadini, Selgovae, Novantes, Damnii, etc. — T. Innes, Critical Essay on 
the Ancient Inhabitants of the Northern Parts of Britain or Scotland, book i., ch. ii., art. i. 

16 Herodian (lib. iii.), in his account of Severus's expedition, written about 240, calls the 
same inhabitants of Caledonia simply Britons, but he describes them as Picts, or painted, in 
these words : " They mark their bodies with various pictures of all manner of animals, and 
therefore they clothe not themselves lest they hide the painted outside of their bodies." — Innes, 
book i., ch. iii., art. i. 

11 " The Scots, in their own tongue, have their name for the painted body [Cruithnigh], 
for that they are marked by sharp-pointed instruments of iron, with black pigments, with 
the figures of various animals. . . . 

" Some nations, not only in their vestments, but also in their bodies, have certain things 
peculiar to themselves . . . nor is there wanting to the nation of the Picts the name of the 
body, but the efficient needle, with minute punctures, rubs in the expressed juices of a native 
herb, that it may bring these scars to its own fashion : an infamous nobility with painted 
limbs." — Isadore of Seville, Origines, 1. ix., ch. ii.; and 1. xix., ch. xxiii. 

18 The Picts and Scots have usually been associated with Caledonia. These names are 
recent in origin, being used only by later Roman writers. Bede (sixth cent.) calls Caledonia 
" Provincia Pictorum " ; and it would seem that in his time the name Picts, or Pehts, had 
nearly superseded the older term Caledonii — derived from the Cymric Celydon, and this 
related to the generic Galatse, Celts, Galli. — Nicholas, Pedigree of the English People, p. 49. 
The proper Scots, as no one denies, were a Gaelic colony from Ireland. The only 
question is as to the Picts or Caledonians. Were they another Gaelic tribe, the vestige of a 
Gaelic occupation of the island earlier than the British occupation, or were they simply 
Britons who had never been brought under the Roman dominion ? The geographical aspect 
of the case favors the former belief, but the weight of the philological evidence seems to be 
on the side of the latter. — Freeman, Norman Conquest, ch. ii., sec. 1. 

The Picts were simply Britons who had been sheltered from Roman conquest by the 

198 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

fastnesses of the Highlands, and who were at last roused in their turn to attack by the weak- 
ness of the province and the hope of plunder. Their invasions penetrated to the heart of the 
island. Raids so extensive could hardly have been effected without help from within, and 
the dim history of the time allows us to see not merely an increase of disunion between the 
Romanized and un-Romanized population of Britain, but even an alliance between the last 
and their free kinsfolk, the Picts. — J. R. Green, Short History of the English People, ch. i., 
sec. 1. 

The Southern Picts are said by Bede to have had seats within these mountains. . . . 
These districts consist of the Perthshire and Forfarshire Highlands, the former of which is 
known by the name of Atholl. The western boundary of the territory of the Southern Picts 
was Drumalban, which separated them from the Scots of Dalriada, and their southern boun- 
dary the Forth. The main body of the Southern Picts also belonged no doubt to the Gaelic 
race, though they may have possessed some differences in the idiom of their language ; but 
the original population of the country, extending from the Forth to the Tay, consisted of part 
of the tribe of Damnonii, who belonged to the Cornish variety of the British race, and they 
appear to have been incorporated with the Southern Picts, and to have introduced a British 
element into their language. The Frisian settlements, too, on the shores of the Firth of Forth 
may also have left their stamp on this part of the nation. — Celtic Scotland, vol. i., p. 231. 

19 This Drust is clearly connected with Galloway ; and we thus learn that when two 
kings appear in the Pictish Chronicle as reigning together, one of them is probably king of 
the Picts of Galloway. 

" Near to the parish church of Anwoth, in Galloway, is a low undulating range of hills, 
called the Boreland hills. One of these goes by the name of Trusty's Hill, and round its 
top may be traced the remains of a vitrified wall." — Stuart's Sculptured Stones, vol. i., p. 31. 

20 He, too, was probably a king of the Picts of Galloway, and traces of his name also can 
be found in the topography of that district. The old name of the parish of New Abbey, in 
Kirkcudbright, was Loch Kendeloch. 

21 Skene says that Talorcan was obviously the son of that Ainfrait, the son of Aedilfrid, 
an elder brother of Osuald, who on his father's death had taken refuge with the Picts, and 
his son Talorcan must have succeeded to the throne through a Pictish mother. At the time, 
then, when King Oswiu extended his sway over the Britons and Scots, there was a king of the 
Anglic race by paternal descent actually reigning over the Picts. Tighernac records his 
death in 657, and Bede tells us that within three years after he had slain King Penda, Oswiu 
subjected the greater part of the Picts to the dominion of the Angles. It is probable, there- 
fore, that he claimed their submission to himself as the cousin and heir on the paternal side 
of their king, Talorcan, and enforced his claim by force of arms. 

22 Brudei (Bredei, or Brude) was paternally a scion of the royal house of Alclyde, his 
father, Bili, appearing in the Welsh genealogies annexed to Nennius as the son of Neithon 
and father of that Eugein who slew Domnall Brec in 642. His mother was the daughter of 
Talorcan mac Ainfrait, the last independent king of the Picts before they were subjected by 



THE Scots of Dalriada acquired possession of the peninsula of Kintyre 
and adjacent territory in Argyle at the beginning of the sixth century. 
About 503 Loarn More, son of Ere, settled there with his brothers, Angus 
and Fergus, and some of their followers. They came from Irish Dalriada — 
a district in Ireland approximately corresponding to or included in the 
northern portion of the present county of Antrim. 

Of the Scots of Ireland we have frequent mention by the Roman histor- 
ians. As we have seen, their island was for some centuries known by the 
name of Scotia, 1 and after the Scots had settled in Albania, it continued to 
be called Scotia Major in distinction from Scotia Minor, which was the first 
form of the present name, " Scotland," as applied to North Britain. 

The following references to the Scots are found in the History of Ammi- 
anus Marcellinus (written between 380 and 390), and they are the first ac- 
counts that we have of these people under that name, although they may have 
been of the same race with the " Hibernians " mentioned by Eumenius in 296, 
who, with the Picts, were said by him to have been the hereditary enemies of 
the Britons in Caesar's time. It seems more probable, however, that the 
term " Hibernians " was first applied by the Romans to the inhabitants of 
Western Scotland. 

These were the events which took place in Illyricum and in the East. 
But the next year, that of Constantius's tenth and Julian's third consulship 
[a.d. 360], the affairs of Britain became troubled in consequence of the in- 
cursions of the savage nations of Picts and Scots, who, breaking the peace to 
which they had agreed, were plundering the districts on their borders, and 
keeping in constant alarm the provinces exhausted by former disasters. — 
(Book xx., ch. i.) 

At this time [a.d. 364], the trumpet, as it were, gave signal for war 
throughout the whole Roman world ; and the barbarian tribes on our fron- 
tier were moved to make incursions on those territories which lay nearest to 
them. The Allemanni laid waste Gaul and Rhaetia at the same time. The 
Sarmatians and Quadi ravaged Pannonia. The Picts, Scots, Saxons, and 
Attecotti harassed the Britons with incessant invasions. 2 

It will be sufficient here to mention that at that time [a.d. 368] the Picts, 
who were divided into two nations, the Dicalidones and the Vecturiones, 
and likewise the Attecotti, a very warlike people, and the Scots were all 
roving over different parts of the country, and committing great ravages. — 
(Book xxvi., ch. iv.) 

Theodosius, father of the emperor of that name, finally succeeded in driv- 
ing the invaders north of Severus's wall, and the country between that and 
the Wall of Hadrian was added to the Roman Empire about 368 as the fifth 
province in Britain, and called Valentia, after the reigning emperor. The 


200 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

legions becoming reduced by the revolt of Maximus about 390, however, 
further incursions of the Picts and Scots took place ; and though fresh 
troops were sent against them and the territory again recovered, the final 
withdrawal of the garrisons during the next twenty years left the province 
wellnigh defenceless and exposed to the raids of the savages, who from that 
time on broke through the walls with impunity and overran and destroyed 
the Roman settlements at will (Ammianus, book xxvii., ch. viii.). 

The early attacks on Britain by the Scots seem to have been made directly 
from Ireland, and were more in the nature of predatory forays than perma- 
nent territorial conquests. They first appear to have come through Wales.' 

The History of Nennius, so-called 4 (a mixture of fables and half-truths), 
tells us : 

§ n. ^neas reigned over the Latins three years ; Ascanius, thirty-three 
years ; after whom Silvius reigned twelve years, and Posthumus thirty-nine 
years : the former, from whom the kings of Alba are called Silvan, was 
brother to Brutus, who governed Britain at the time Eli, the high-priest, 
judged Israel, and when the ark of the covenant was taken by a foreign 
people. But Posthumus, his brother, reigned among the Latins. [Fabulous.] 

§ 12. After an interval of not less than eight hundred years, came the 
Picts, and occupied the Orkney Islands [?] : whence they laid waste many 
regions, and seized those on the left-hand side of Britain, where they still 
remain, keeping possession of a third part of Britain to this day. 

§ 13. Long after this, the Scots arrived in Ireland from Spain. [?] . . . 

§ 14. . . . The sons of Liethali obtained the country of the Dimetse 
where is a city called Menavia [St. David's] and the province Guiher and 
Cetguela [Caer Kidwelly, in Carmarthenshire], which they held till they 
were expelled from every part of Britain, by Cunedda and his sons. 

§ 15. . . . The Britons came to Britain in the third age of the 
world ; and in the fourth, the Scots took possession of Ireland. The Britons 
who, suspecting no hostilities, were unprovided with the means of defence, 
were unanimously and incessantly attacked, both by the Scots from the 
west and by the Picts from the north. A long interval after this, the Ro- 
mans obtained the empire of the world. 

§ 62. . . . The great king, Mailcun, reigned among the Britons, 
i. e., in the district of Guenedota, because his great-great-grandfather Cun- 
edda, with his twelve sons, had come before from the left-hand part, i. e., 
from the country which is called Manau Gustodia, one hundred and forty- 
six years before Mailcun reigned, and expelled the Scots with much slaugh- 
ter from those countries, and they never returned again to inhabit them. 

The invasions of the Scots and Picts after the departure of the Romans 
from Britain (418-426) are thus described by Gildas, who wrote in the mid- 
dle of the sixth century : 

§ 13. At length also, new races of tyrants sprang up, in terrific numbers, 
and the island, still bearing its Roman name, but casting off her institutes 
and laws, sent forth among the Gauls that bitter scion of her own planting, 
Maximus, with a great number of followers, and the ensigns of royalty, 
which he bore without decency and without lawful right, but in a tyrannical 
manner, and amid the disturbances of the seditious soldiery. . . . 

The Scots and Picts 201 

§ 14. After this, Britain is left deprived of all her soldiery and armed 
bands, of her cruel governors, and of the flower of her youth, who went with 
Maximus, but never again returned ; and utterly ignorant as she was of the 
art of war, groaned in amazement for many years under the cruelty of two 
foreign nations — the Scots from the northwest, and the Picts from the north. 

§ 15. The Britons, impatient at the assaults of the Scots and Picts, their 
hostilities and dreaded oppressions, send ambassadors to Rome with letters, 
entreating in piteous terms the assistance of an armed band to protect them, 
and offering loyal and ready submission to the authority of Rome, if they 
only would expel their invading foes. A legion is immediately sent, forget- 
ting their past rebellion, and provided sufficiently with arms. When they 
had crossed over the sea and landed, they came at once to close conflict 
with their cruel enemies, and slew great numbers of them. All of them 
were driven beyond the borders, and the humiliated natives rescued from 
the bloody slavery which awaited them. . . . 

§ 16. The Roman legion had no sooner returned home in joy and tri- 
umph, than their former foes, like hungry and ravening wolves, rushing with 
greedy jaws upon the fold which is left without a shepherd, and wafted both 
by the strength of oarsmen and the blowing wind, break through the boun- 
daries, and spread slaughter on every side, and like mowers cutting down the 
ripe corn, they cut up, tread under foot, and overrun the whole country. 

§ 17. And now again they send suppliant ambassadors, with their gar- 
ments rent and their heads covered with ashes, imploring assistance from the 
Romans, and like timorous chickens, crowding under the protecting wings of 
their parents, that their wretched country might not altogether be destroyed, 
and that the Roman name which now was but an empty sound to fill the ear, 
might not become a reproach even to distant nations. Upon this, the Ro- 
mans, moved with compassion, as far as human nature can be, at the relations 
of such horrors, send forward, like eagles in their flight, their unexpected 
bands of cavalry by land and mariners by sea, and planting their terrible 
swords upon the shoulders of their enemies, they mow them down like leaves 
which fall at the destined period ; and as a mountain-torrent swelled with 
numerous streams, and bursting its banks with roaring noise, with foaming 
crest and yeasty wave rising to the stars, by whose eddying currents our 
eyes are as it were dazzled, does with one of its billows overwhelm every 
obstacle in its way, so did our illustrious defenders vigorously drive our 
enemies' band beyond the sea, if any could so escape them ; for it was be- 
yond those same seas that they transported, year after year, the plunder which 
they had gained, no one daring to resist them. 

§ 1 8. The Romans, therefore, left the country, giving notice that they 
could no longer be harassed by such laborious expeditions, nor suffer the Ro- 
man standards, with so large and brave an army, to be worn out by sea and 
land by fighting against these unwarlike, plundering vagabonds ; but that the 
islanders, inuring themselves to warlike weapons, and bravely fighting, should 
valiantly protect their country, their property, wives, and children, and, what 
is dearer than these, their liberty and lives. . . . 

§ 19. No sooner were they gone, than the Picts and Scots, like worms 
which in the heat of mid-day come forth from their holes, hastily land again 
from their canoes, in which they had been carried beyond the Cichican val- 
ley, differing one from another in manners, but inspired with the same avid- 
ity for blood, and all more eager to shroud their villainous faces in bushy 
hair than to cover with decent clothing those parts of their body which 
required it. Moreover, having heard of the departure of our friends, and 

202 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

their resolution never to return, they seized with greater boldness than before 
on all the country towards the extreme north as far as the wall. To oppose 
them there was placed on the heights a garrison equally slow to fight and ill 
adapted to run away, a useless and panic-struck company, who slumbered 
away days and nights on their unprofitable watch. Meanwhile the hooked 
weapons of their enemies were not idle, and our wretched countrymen were 
dragged from the wall and dashed against the ground. Such premature 
death, however, painful as it was, saved them from seeing the miserable suf- 
ferings of their brothers and children. But why should I say more? They 
left their cities, abandoned the protection of the wall, and dispersed them- 
selves in flight more desperately than before. The enemy, on the other 
hand, pursued them with more unrelenting cruelty than before, and 
butchered our countrymen like sheep, so that their habitations were like 
those of savage beasts ; for they turned their arms upon each other, and for 
the sake of a little sustenance, imbrued their hands in the blood of their fel- 
low countrymen. Thus foreign calamities were augmented by domestic 
feuds ; so that the whole country was entirely destitute of provisions, save 
such as could be procured in the chase. 

§ 20. Again, therefore, the wretched remnant, sending to ^Etius, a 
powerful Roman citizen, address him as follows : " To JEtius, now con- 
sul for the third time: the groans of the Britons." And again, a little 
further, thus : " The barbarians drive us to the sea ; the sea throws us back 
on the barbarians : thus two modes of death await us, we are either slain or 
drowned." The Romans, however, could not assist them, and in the mean- 
time the discomfited people, wandering in the woods, began to feel the effects 
of a severe famine, which compelled many of them without delay to yield 
themselves up to their cruel persecutors, to obtain subsistence ; others of 
them, however, lying hid in mountains, caves, and woods, continually sallied 
out from thence to renew the war. And then it was, for the first time, that 
they overthrew their enemies, who had for so many years been living in 
their country ; for their trust was not in man, but in God ; according to the 
maxim of Philo, " We must have divine assistance, when that of man fails." 
The boldness of the enemy was for a while checked, but not the wicked- 
ness of our countrymen ; the enemy left our people, but the people did not 
leave their sins. 

§ 21. For it has always been a custom with our nation, as it is at pres- 
ent, to be impotent in repelling foes, but bold and invincible in raising civil 
war, and bearing the burdens of their offences. They are impotent, I say, 
in following the standard of peace and truth, but bold in wickedness and 
falsehood. The audacious invaders therefore return to their winter quar- 
ters, determined before long again to return and plunder. And then, too, 
the Picts for the first time seated themselves at the extremity of the island, 
where they afterwards continued, occasionally plundering and wasting the 

As already stated, about the year 503 the sons of Ere, a descendant of 
Cairbre Riadhi (founder of the kingdom of Dalriada in the northern part of 
the present county Antrim), passed from Ireland to Scotland with a body 
of their followers, and established a government over some of their country- 
men who had previously settled in the southwest of Argyle. One of these 
sons, Fergus More, succeeded his brother Loarn in the chiefship, and is 
generally esteemed the founder of the dynasty. 6 

The Scots and Picts 203 

Fergus was followed by his son, Domangart (died 505), by the latter's 
sons, Comgall (died 538) and Gabhran (died 560), and by Comgall'sson, Co- 
nal (died 574). JEdan, son of Gabhran, seized the succession after the death 
of his cousin, Conal, and during his long reign did much to increase the 
power and influence of the colony and to create a respect for the Scots' arms, 
by making war against the Picts, the Britons of Strathclyde, and the Saxons." 
He lived to see his dominion independent of the Irish Dalriada, to which it 
had before been tributary, and is usually esteemed the founder of the 
kingdom of the Scots, having been the first to form the families and tribes- 
men of his race into a compact and united people. 

St. Columba settled in Iona about 565, and the colony of Dalriada in the 
time of JEdan was, in consequence, the centre and chief source of the Chris- 
tian faith and propaganda in Britain. From thence missionaries travelled 
to many parts of the island and to the Continent ; and the conversion of 
the Gaelic Picts of the north by the preaching and ministrations of Columba 
no doubt prepared the way for the union of the Scots and Picts, which, more 
than two centuries later, followed the conquering career of the most renowned 
of ^Edan's successors. 

^Edan ascended the throne of Dalriada in 574 ; or perhaps it would be 
more correct to say that he became chief of the Dalriad tribe. In 603 he led 
a numerous force — recruited largely from the Britons of Strathclyde — 
against ^Ethelfrid, the Anglian king of Bernicia. 7 Meeting him in Liddes- 
dale, near the frontier line of the kingdoms of Bernicia and Strathclyde (in 
the present Roxburghshire), a decisive battle was fought at Degsastan, which 
resulted in the utter defeat and rout of ^Edan's army, and the extension of 
the western boundary of the Anglian kingdom to the river Esk. 8 The annal- 
ist, Tighernac, records ^dan's death in 606, at the age of seventy-four. 

He was succeeded by his son, Eocha Buidhe, who resigned the throne to 
his son, Conadh Cerr. In the year 629, the latter was slain in the battle of 
Fedhaeoin, fought in Ireland between the Irish Dalriads and the Irish Picts, 
or Cruithne. Both parties to this contest received auxiliaries from Scotland ; 
Eocha Buidhe appears also in this battle, on the side of the Picts, and op- 
posed to his son, Conadh, the leader of the Dalriad Scots. 9 Mr. Skene infers 
from this, and from other confirmatory circumstances, that Eocha, at this 
time having withdrawn from Dalriada, must have been ruler of the Gallo- 
way Picts. 10 He died later in the same year. 

Domnall Brecc, or Breac, brother to Conadh Cerr, succeeded to the 
throne of Dalriada on the death of the latter. In 634, he fought the 
Northumbrians at Calathros (now Callender, in Stirlingshire), and was 
defeated. 11 Three years later he was again defeated with great loss in 
the battle of Mag Rath, in Ireland, whither he had gone as an ally of the 
Cruithne, or Irish Picts, in their contest with Domnall mac Aed, king of the 
Irish Dalriads. In 638, Tighernac records another battle and defeat, being 
that of Glinnemairison, or Glenmureson, which name has been identified 

204 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

with that of the present Mureston Water, south of the river Almond, in 
the parishes of Mid and West Calder (Edinburghshire). As the siege of 
Etin (Edinburgh) is mentioned in the same reference, and as this was the 
second defeat which the Dalriad king had suffered at the hands of the 
Angles within the space of four years in contiguous territory, it is to be sup- 
posed that these battles may have resulted from the efforts of Domnall 
Brecc to dispossess the Angles of that portion of their dominions in or near 
which the battles were fought. The battle of Degsastan, near the Esk, in 
603, and these fights on both sides of the Avon in 634 and 638, would seem 
to fix these streams as at that time marking the extremities of the frontier 
line between Northumbria and Strathclyde." 

While the Britons were naturally allied with the Scots in these wars against 
the common enemy of both, it appears that the circumstances of their union 
were not otherwise sufficiently favorable to insure more than the temporary 
ascendancy of the Dalriad chief as their leader at this time. It is possible 
he may have taken the opportunity of his leadership as an occasion for 
seeking permanent rule ; but if this were so, he could not have met with 
much encouragement from the Britons ; for in the year 642, Tighernac tells 
us, he was slain at Strathcawin (or Strath Carron), by Oan, king of the 
Britons. 18 

In 654, Penda, king of the Angles of Mercia, with his British or North 
Welsh allies, was defeated by Oswiu, King of Northumbria, in a battle fought 
near the Firth of Forth. 14 Penda and nearly all of his leaders were slain. 
This victory not only established Oswiu firmly upon the Northumbrian 
throne, but also enabled him to bring under his rule the dominions of the 
Strathclyde Britons and of the Scots and Southern Picts. 15 In 672, after 
Ecgfrid had succeeded Oswiu on the Northumbrian throne, the Picts at- 
tempted to regain their independence, but without success." 

After the death of Domnall Brecc in 642, and the successes of Oswiu, 
which must indirectly at least have influenced Dalriada, that kingdom seems 
to have remained for a long time broken up into rival clans, the Cinel 
Loarn, or Race of Loam, and the Cinel Gabhran being the two most impor- 
tant. 17 It was not until 678 that these clans again appear united in offensive 
warfare. In that year they fought against the Britons, but were defeated. 18 
Afterwards, in union with the Picts, they seem to have made attempts at 
recovering their independence, and so far succeeded that Ecgfrid, then 
king of the Northumbrians, felt obliged to enter Pictland with an invading 
army to reduce them. This was in 685. On June 20th of that year a great 
battle was fought at Duin Nechtan, or Nechtansmere (Dunnichen, in For- 
farshire ?), in which the English king and his entire force perished. 19 

" From that time," in the words of Bede, " the hopes and strength 
of the English kingdom began to waver and retrograde ; for the Picts re- 
covered their own lands, which had been held by the English and the Scots 
that were in battle, and some of the Britons their liberty, which they have 

The Scots and Picts 205 

now enjoyed for about forty-six years. Among the many English who then 
either fell by the sword, or were made slaves, or escaped by flight out of the 
country of the Picts, the most reverend man of God, Trumwine, who had 
been made bishop over them, withdrew with his people that were in the 
monastery of Abercurnig." 

The king of the Picts at this time was an Anglo-Briton, Brudei, son of 
Bili, King of Strathclyde," and grandson through his mother of that Pictish 
king, Talorcan, who was called the son of Ainfrait (Eanfrid), the Angle. 
Ainfrait was the brother of King Oswiu, and uncle to King Ecgfrid. On the 
death of ^Ethelfrid, father to Ainfrait and Oswiu, in 617, his throne had been 
seized by ^Edwine. Bede tells us 21 that during all the time King ^Edwine 
reigned in Northumbria, Ainfrait, with his brothers and many of the 
nobility, lived in banishment among the Scots, or Picts. 

During the forty-six years between the defeat of the Angles at Nechtans- 
mere and the period at which Bede's history is brought to a close, two con- 
flicts took place between the Dalriads and the Strathclyde Britons, in both 
of which the latter were defeated." These occurred in the neighboring 
territories of the Picts, during the reign of Nechtan, son of Derili, who ruled 
from before 710 to 724. It was this Nechtan who, as Bede states," was per- 
suaded to forsake the teachings and customs of the Scottish Church, which 
had been established in Pictland by St. Columba, and to conform to those 
of Rome. In 717 he expelled the Columban priests from his kingdom and 
gave their possessions and places to such of the clergy as had conformed to 

Shortly after this date, Selbhac, son of Farchar Fata, and leader of the 
Dalriad tribe known as Cinel Loarn, seems to have obtained the ascend- 
ancy over the rival tribe of Gabhran, and succeeded in uniting the Dalriad 
Scots again into one great clan, of which he became the head. Selbhac is 
the first chief after the death of Domnall Brecc in 642 to acquire the title of 
King of Dalriada. In 723 he resigned the throne to his son, Dungal, and 
became a cleric. 

In 724, Nechtan, king of the Picts, also having become a cleric, was 
succeeded by Druxst (or Drust). The latter was expelled from Pictland in 
726 by Alpin, son of Eachaidh (or Eachach) by a Pictish princess. 84 At 
the same time, Dungal, the Cinel Loarn chieftain, who occupied the throne 
of Dalriada, was expelled from that dominion and succeeded by Eochaidh 
(or Eochach), the head of the rival Scottish clan Gabhran. Eochaidh was 
a brother or half-brother to Alpin, then king of the Picts, both being sons 
of Eachaidh, Domnall Brecc's grandson. 96 

Dungal's father, Selbhac, in 727, made an unsuccessful attempt to 
restore his son to the Scottish throne, but Eochaidh seems to have con- 
tinued in power until 733, in which year Tighernac records his death. 

In Pictavia also, at this time, the right to the throne was disputed by 
several powerful rivals. Nechtan, who had resigned his rule to Druxst in 

206 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

order that he himself might experiment with monastic life, now returned to 
contest the claims of Alpin, the Dalriadic aspirant who had driven out 
Nechtan's legatee. Angus of Fortrenn, son of Fergus, also appeared as 
a claimant. Alpin was defeated by Angus in a battle fought in 728 at 
Monaigh Craebi (Moncrieff), and the territory west of the river Tay was 
lost to him in consequence. Not long afterwards, Nechtan also met Alpin 
in battle at Scone, completely overthrew his forces and partially recovered 
the Pictish kingdom and title for himself. 88 

In 729 Angus and Nechtan met and contested for the supreme leader- 
ship. A battle was fought at Loch Inch, near the river Spey, which resulted 
in the defeat and rout of Nechtan's forces and the assumption of kingly 
authority and title by Angus. Soon after this battle, Angus encountered 
and slew Druxst ; and in 732, the last of his rivals was removed by the death 
of Nechtan. Angus ruled Pictland for thirty years. 

In 733, Eochaidh, King of Dalriada, having died, Selbhac's son, Dungal, 
regained the throne of that kingdom. During the next year, Dungal having 
aroused the anger of Angus by an attack upon the latter's son, Brude, the 
Pictish king invaded Dalriada, and put its ruler to flight. Two years later 
(in 736), Angus destroyed the Scots' city of Creic, and taking possession of 
Donad, the capital, he laid waste all Dalriada, put in chains the two sons of 
Selbhac, 27 and appears to have driven out the fighting men of the two leading 
clans. One of these, the Cinel Loam, was then under the chiefship of 
Muredach, and the other, the Cinel Gabhran, was ruled by that Alpin mac 
Eachaidh who had been driven from the Pictish throne by Nechtan in 728. 
Both of these chieftains attempted to free their country from the grasp of 
the invader by carrying the war into Pictland. Muredach fought the Picts 
on the banks of the Avon (at Carriber), where he was opposed by Talorgan, 
brother to Angus, and was completely defeated and routed by that lieu- 
tenant. 38 Alpin himself, about 1740, likewise invaded Ayrshire, the country 
of the Galloway Picts, and though he succeeded in " laying waste the lands 
of the Galwegians," he met his death the following year while in their ter- 
ritories. 29 In the same year in which Alpin was killed (741), Angus is said 
to have completed the conquest of Dalriada. Its subjection to the Picts 
must have continued at least during the period of his life. 

The existing authentic records for the century following the death of 
Alpin in 741 give but little information as to Dalriada, beyond the names of 
some of its clan chieftains. It may reasonably be supposed to have remained 
during that time a subject state of the then powerful Pictish kingdom. 

Simeon of Durham tells us that a battle was fought in 744 between the 
Picts and the Britons, 30 and in 750, the Picts, under the leadership of Talor- 
gan, the brother of Angus, met the Britons in a great battle at Magedauc' 
(in Dumbartonshire), in which Talorgan was slain. 31 Eadberht, Anglic king 
of Northumbria, in 750, added to his Galloway possessions the plain of Kyle 
(in Ayrshire) and "adjacent regions." He formed an alliance with Angus 

The Scots and Picts 207 

a few years later against the Britons of Strathclyde, and in 756 received 
the submission of that kingdom. 8 * 

Five years later (761) Angus mac Fergus died, and his brother, Brude, 
came to the Pictish throne. He died in 763, and was succeeded by Ciniod 
(Kenneth), son of Wirdech, who reigned twelve years." Alpin, son of 
Wroid, followed Kenneth, and his death is recorded in 780 as king of the 
Saxons, 34 which would seem to point to his acquisition of more or less of the 
Northumbrian territory south of the Forth. 

Drust, son of Talorgan, succeeded Alpin, and reigned for five years, his 
succession being disputed by Talorgan, son of Angus, who also reigned in 
part of the Pictish kingdom for two years and a half. Conal, son of Tarla, 
then held the throne for about five years, when he was overthrown and suc- 
ceeded by Constantine, son of Fergus. 86 

Conal fled to Dalriada, then under the government of Constantine, son of 
Domnall, whom he seems later to have succeeded, for in 807 Conal's assassina- 
tion is reported as that of one of the rulers of Dalriada. After that date the name 
of Constantine, son of Fergus, appears as King of Dalriada for the nine years 
following, so that during that period this kingdom was doubtless united with 
Pictland under the one ruler. The two Constantines may have been identical. 

For some years after 816 Constantine's brother, Angus mac Fergus (2d), 
governed Dalriada, and on the death of the former in 820, Angus succeeded 
him as ruler over both kingdoms. After 825 Dalriada was governed by Aed, 
son of Boanta ; and then for a term by Angus's own son, Eoganan. 

In 834 Angus died, when Drust, son of Constantine, and Talorgan, son of 
Wthoil, are said to have reigned jointly for the space of two or three years, 
the former probably ruling the Southern Picts, and the latter those of the 
North. It is likely that this joint reign arose from a disputed succession, for 
about the same time another aspirant to the throne appeared in the person 
of Alpin, who was called king of the Scots, and apparently must have 
claimed title to the Pictish throne through maternal descent. He fought 
the Picts near Dundee in 834, and was successful in his first battle ; but 
later in the same year was defeated and slain. 88 

In 836 Eoganan, son of Angus, is recorded in the Pictish Chronicle as 
the successor to Drust and Talorgan. He reigned for three years, and in 
839 was slain by the Danes, who had invaded the kingdom. On his death, 
Kenneth (son of Alpin, king of the Scots), who had been chief of the Dal- 
riad clans since the death of his father in 834, made war against the Picts. 
Taking advantage of the presence of the Danish pirates, and perhaps pos- 
sessing some inherited title to the Pictish throne, he succeeded in establish- 
ing himself first as the supreme ruler of Dalriada (839) and then, four or 
five years later, became also the king of the Picts. 87 Between the death of 
Eoganan and the accession of Kenneth mac Alpin, there were two inter- 
mediate kings of Pictland. These were Wrad, son of Bargoit, who reigned 
three years, and Bred, son of Ferat, who reigned one year. 

208 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

When Kenneth mac Alpin became king of the Picts in 844, his territories 
embraced that part of Scotland now included in the counties of Perth, Fife, 
Stirling, Dumbarton, and Argyle. 38 North and west of this district the 
country continued in a state of practical independence for a long time after- 
ward, being in part occupied by the Northern Picts, and in part by the 
Norsemen. South of Kenneth's territories the Northumbrian Angles occu- 
pied the province of Bernicia, which included most of the present counties 
of Scotland south of the Forth and east of the Avon and Esk. They also 
maintained lordship over part of the district now known as Galloway and 
Ayr. The Cymric Britons of Strathclyde lived and ruled where are now the 
counties of Renfrew, Lanark, Dumfries, Peebles (Clydesdale, Nithsdale, and 
Annandale) ; the adjacent portions of Ayr and Galloway and also for a con- 
siderable distance to the south of Solway Firth. 

The reasons for the success of Kenneth in establishing himself and the 
small and numerically insignificant 39 colony of Dalriad Scots who inhabited 
the southwestern portion of Argyle as the ruling element in the land of the 
Picts have never been very clearly understood. Superior prowess, 40 mater- 
nal ancestry, 41 favorable matrimonial alliances, 42 the labors of missionaries, 48 
the wars of the Picts with other intruders, 44 the higher culture of the Scots, 4 * 
and various other causes have been surmised and assigned in explanation. 
Our present knowledge of the period will not justify more than a tentative 
acceptance of these several theories as a whole, with the allowance that each 
one probably accounts in part, or, might account in part, for the result. 

Kenneth died in 858, and his brother Donald succeeded him, who reigned 
four years. On Donald's death, Constantine, the son of Kenneth, came 
to the throne. After a reign of some fifteen years, he was killed in battle 
with the Norsemen, who fought the Scots 46 at Inverdufatha (Inverdovet) 
near the Firth of Forth, in 876-7. Constantine was succeeded by his brother, 
Aedh, or Hugh, who reigned as king of the Picts for one year, when he was 
killed by his own people. 

While, under the law of Tanistry, which governed the descent of the 
crown among the Scots, Donald, son of Constantine, was entitled to rule, yet 
by the Pictish law, Eocha (son of Constantine's sister and of Run, king of 
the Britons of Strathclyde) was the next heir ; and as the Pictish party at 
this time seems to have been in the ascendancy, Eocha was made king. 
Being too young to reign, however, another king was associated with him as 
governor. 47 This governor, or regent, was Grig, or Ciric, son of Dungaile. 
While the earlier Pictish Chronicle gives no account of this reign beyond 
the statement that after a period of eleven years Eocha and Grig were both 
expelled from the kingdom, the later writers have made a popular hero of 
Grig ; and his virtues and achievements are magnified to most gigantic 
proportions. 48 Grig, having been forced to abdicate, was succeeded in 889 
by Donald, son of Constantine, who reigned for eleven years. Donald 
was also chosen as King of Strathclyde, which henceforth continued to re- 

/ OF THE \\ 


\vc^ LFFOP ^/ The Scots and Picts 209 

ceive its princes from the reigning Scottish family until it was finally merged 
into the Scottish kingdom. During Donald's reign his kingdom ceased to 
be called Pictland or Pictavia and became known as the kingdom of Alban 
or Albania, and its rulers were no longer called kings of the Picts, but 
kings of Alban." Donald was slain in battle with the Danes, probably at 
Dunotter in Kincardineshire. 50 

From 900 to 942 the throne was held by Constantine, son of Aedh, and 
cousin to Donald. During his reign, ^Ethelstan, King of Mercia, became 
ruler of Wessex (in 925), and at once set about to extend his power northward 
from the Humber. He first arranged for a marriage between his sister and 
Sihtric, the Danish ruler of Deira, the southern province of Northumbria. 
On Sihtric's death (926), ^Ethelstan immediately seized his kingdom and an- 
nexed it to his own, driving out Guthferth, the son of Sihtric, who had suc- 
ceeded his father, and forming an alliance for peace with Ealdred, ruler of 
Bernicia, the northern province of Northumbria, and with Constantine, King 
of Alban." A little later, however, Aulaf, or Olaf, the eldest son of Sihtric, 
having in the meantime married King Constantine's daughter, and thereby 
secured the co-operation of the Scottish ruler, succeeded also in enlisting 
in his behalf Olaf of Dublin, a leader of the Danes, or Ostmen, of Ireland, 
and Owin, king of the Cumbrians. 63 Together these allies prepared for an 
attempt to recover Olaf's heritage. But ^Ethelstan, anticipating them, in- 
vaded Alban by sea and land and ravaged a great part of that kingdom. 68 

Three years afterwards the confederated forces again assembled and 
made a descent upon Deira. At first they were successful in their attacks, 
but finally encountered ^Ethelstan with all his army on the field of Brunan- 
burgh, and there fought the great battle which takes its name from that 
place. ^Ethelstan was victorious and drove the allied forces of the Scots 
and Danes from the field with great losses, among the slain being the son of 
the Alban king, with many of his bravest leaders. 64 

In 942 Constantine, having retired to a monastery, was succeeded by 
Malcolm, son of Donald, who also acquired sovereignty over Cumbria, 66 and 
reigned until 954, when he was killed in a battle with the Norsemen near 
Fodresach, now Fetteresso, in Kincardineshire. The next king, Indulf, was 
also killed by the Norsemen in 962, at Cullen, in Banffshire. 66 During his 
reign the kingdom seems first to have been extended south of the Forth, 
Edinburgh for a time being added to its territory. Duff, or Dubh, son of 
Malcolm, next occupied the throne, but he was expelled about 967 by 
Cuilean, or Colin, son of Indulf, who succeeded him as king, and was slain 
himself four years later (971) in a quarrel with the Strathclydensians. 

Kenneth II., brother of Duff, and son of the first Malcolm, then gained 
the crown. He is said to have greatly ravaged the territory of the Strath- 
clyde Welsh ; and then, in order to protect himself against their counter- 
attacks, to have fortified the fords of the river Forth, which separated the 
two kingdoms. 67 Immediately after his attack on Strathclyde, he also 

210 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

invaded Saxonia, as the northern part of Northumbria was then called. The 
following year, Kenneth MacMalcolm made a second attempt against the 
same district. At that time, Domnall, or Dunwallaun, son of Eoain, was king 
of the Strathclyde Britons. 58 Edinburgh is supposed to have been permanently 
ceded to the Scots during the reign of Kenneth MacMalcolm, as a result of his 
continued operations against the territory south of the Forth. 69 Kenneth 
was slain by some of his subjects at Fettercairn in Kincardineshire, 995. 80 

He was succeeded by Constantine, son of Colin Maclndulf, who, after a 
reign of two years, was killed by Kenneth MacMalcolm (2d) and succeeded 
by Kenneth MacDufT (Kenneth III.), surnamed Grim, who retained the 
throne for some eight or nine years. 

In 997, the death of Malcolm MacDonald, king of the northern Britons, 
is recorded." 

Kenneth MacDuff was defeated in battle and slain at Strathern in 1005, 
by his cousin, Malcolm, son of King Kenneth MacMalcolm. He was known 
as Malcolm II., or Malcolm MacKenneth, and reigned from 1005 until 1034, 
when he is said to have been assassinated at Glamis, in Angus. He is ac- 
cused of having procured, about 1033, the death of a son of Boete MacKen- 
neth, and grandson of Kenneth II. (or of Kenneth HI.) 62 The claim of 
Kenneth MacDuff's grandson to the crown, under the Pictish law of suc- 
cession,* was superior to that of King Malcolm's own grandson, Duncan. 
In 1006, shortly after the commencement of his reign, King Malcolm II. 
invaded Northumbria, but was defeated and driven out with the loss of 
many of his best warriors. 88 Twelve years later (1018), in conjunction with 
Owen the Bald, king of the Strathclyde Britons, Malcolm made a second 
attempt against Northumbria, which proved more successful. In a battle 
fought at Carham, on the Tweed, he defeated the Northumbrians and Danes 
with great loss. 64 In consequence, they were obliged to cede to the victor 
all of Northumbria lying north of the Tweed, which territory from that time 
became a part of Scotland. 85 

The kingdom of Strathclyde, or Cumbria, also, was now completely ab- 
sorbed into Scotland. Its ruler, Owen, having been slain in the year of the 
battle of Carham, the union with Scotland took place through the succession 
of Duncan, grandson of Malcolm, to the lordship of Strathclyde. For that 
portion of his domain which extended south from the Solway Firth, to the 
river Ribble, in Lancashire, Duncan continued to do homage to the King of 
England, as his predecessors before him had done, since the time (945) when 
the English king, Eadmund, had given it " all up to Malcolm, king of the 
Scots, on condition that he should be his fellow-worker as well by sea as by 
land." 88 This Prince Duncan was the son of Bethoc, or Beatrice, Malcolm's 
daughter, who had married Crinan of the House of Athol, lay Abbot of 
Dunkeld, said by Fordun to have been also the Steward of the Isles. On 

* The early Picts had no institution of marriage, succession passing through the maternal 
line alone. See note n, p. 196. 

The Scots and Picts 2 1 1 

the death of Malcolm, his grandfather, in 1034, Duncan, King of Strathclyde, 
ascended the Scottish throne, thus completely uniting the subkingdom of 
Strathclyde with Scotia. 

Another daughter of Malcolm had been given in marriage to Sigurd, the 
Norse jarl, ruler of the Orkney Islands. By her Sigurd had a son, Thorfinn, 
cousin to Duncan, born about 1009, who, on the death of his father, some 
five years later, succeeded to the lordship of Caithness, Sutherland, and 
other districts, including Galloway. 67 In this capacity, he was also over-lord 
of the tributary provinces of Moray and Ross, which at the time of Earl 
Sigurd's death were ruled over by the Mormaor Finleikr, or Finley (father 
of Macbeth). 88 

Duncan, king of the Scots, married the sister 69 of Siward, the Danish 
Earl of Northumbria; and reigned for about five years. He became involved 
in a war with his cousin, Thorfinn, over the sovereignty of the northern dis- 
tricts of Scotland, and was slain at Bothgowan in 1039-40 by Macbeth, who 
had by that time succeeded to the mormaorship of Ross and Moray. 70 Upon 
the supposed circumstances of Duncan's tragic death, as depicted by Boece 
and copied by Holinshed, Shakspeare constructed his play of Macbeth. 

Before going into the details of that tragedy, it will be well to pause 
and take a glance at the surroundings and condition of the Scottish king- 
dom at the beginning of Duncan's brief reign. There are three things 
connected with the preceding reign of his grandfather, Malcolm II., which 
mark it as a distinctive and important epoch in Scottish history. The first 
and most notable of these was the cession to Malcolm by its Danish ruler of 
that portion of the Anglo-Danish kingdom of Northumbria known as Lothian 
— being all that part of eastern Scotland lying north of the Tweed and south 
of the Forth. This cession resulted from the victory of the Scots at Carham 
in 1018, to which allusion has already been made. 71 The next important 
event was the marriage of Malcolm's daughter with Sigurd, the Norse over- 
lord of the northern regions of Scotland, and the establishment of their son, 
Thorfinn, as ruler of that domain on the death of his father. This marriage 
eventually proved to be an effective step toward bringing the whole country 
north of " Scot's Water," 7a under the rule of one king. The third event 
was the accession of Duncan to the kingship or lordship of Strathclyde after 
the death of Owen the Bald, in 1018, and the subsequent peaceful union of 
that kingdom with Scotland on the ascension of Duncan to the Scottish 
throne. It is proper, therefore, to give a brief summary of the circumstances 
leading up to this conjunction of conditions which ultimately resulted in the 
amalgamation of the various racial elements of Scotland into one people. 
The Cumbrian and Norse districts will first be taken up, as being more inti- 
mately associated with the history of Malcolm's nearest male heirs ; and the 
Anglo-Danish province will afterwards be considered in connection with the 
reign of Duncan's son, Malcolm Canmore — in whom its possession may be 
said first to have been definitely confirmed. 7 * 

212 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 


1 Ireland is first mentioned as being also called Scotia by Isadore of Seville, 580-600. 

2 The first recorded appearance of the Saxons off the coast of Gaul is in A.D. 287. 
Eutropius, ix M 21. {Monum. Hist. Brit., p. lxxii.) 

The boats of Irish pirates — or, as they were then called, Scots — ravaged its western 
shores, while a yet more formidable race of freebooters pillaged from Portsmouth to the 
Wash. In their homeland between the Elbe and the Ems, as well as in a wide tract across 
the Ems to the Rhine, a number of German tribes had drawn together into the people of the 
Saxons, and it was to this people that the pirates of the Channel belonged. — J. R. Green, 
Making of England, p. 15. 

3 ' ' We learn from the account given by the historian of their eventual recovery, that the 
districts ravaged by the Picts were those extending from the territories of the independent 
tribes to the Wall of Hadrian between the Tyne and the Solway, and that the districts occu- 
pied by the Scots were in a different direction. They lay on the western frontier, and con- 
sisted of part of the mountain region of Wales on the coast opposite to Ierne, or the island of 
Ireland, from whence they came. 

" Unaided as she was left, Britain held bravely out as soon as her first panic was over ; 
and for some thirty years after the withdrawal of the legions the free province maintained an 
equal struggle against her foes. Of these she probably counted the Saxons as still the least 
formidable. The freebooters from Ireland were not only scourging her western coast, but 
planting colonies at points along its line. To the north of the Firth of Clyde these " Scots" 
settled about this time in the peninsula of Argyle. To the south of it they may have been 
the Gaels, who mastered and gave their name to Galloway ; and there are some indications 
that a larger though a less permanent settlement was being made in the present North Wales." 
— Green, Making of England, p. 23. 

4 Written not long before the ninth century, and, so far as its record of earlier events 
goes, chiefly useful in giving us the form in which they were current in the time of the 

5 Though, as we have seen, his eldest brother Loarn ruled before him, yet Fergus holds 
a more conspicuous position as the father of the dynasty, since it was his descendants, and 
not those of Loarn, who afterwards ruled in Dalriada. It is in him, too, that the scanty 
broken traces of genuine history join the full current of the old fabulous conventional history 
of Scotland. Thus Fergus may be identified with Fergus II. — the fortieth king of Scotland, 
according to Buchanan and the older historians. This identity has served to show with sin- 
gular clearness the simple manner in which the earlier fabulous race of Scots kings was in- 
vented. A Fergus was still the father of the monarchy, but to carry back the line to a 
respectable antiquity, a preceding Fergus was invented, who reigned more than 300 years 
before Christ — much about the time when Babylon was taken by Alexander, as Buchanan 
notices. To fill up the intervening space between the imaginary and the actual Fergus, 
thirty-eight other monarchs were devised, whose portraits may now be seen in the picture- 
gallery of Holyrood. — Burton, History of Scotland, vol. i., p. 287. 

6 Wales, or the country of the Cymri, at this time extended from the Severn to the 
Clyde, and comprised all modern Wales, Cheshire, Lancashire, part of Westmoreland, Cum- 
berland, Dumfriesshire, Ayrshire, Lanarkshire, and Renfrewshire. Novantia, however, re- 
mained Pictish — i, e., Goidelic — in speech and race. Thus, whatever had been the affinity 
in earlier centuries between the Selgovae of Dumfriesshire and the Novantae, or Attecotts, of 
Galloway, it had been replaced in the sixth century by hereditary racial enmity. Galloway 
was peopled by Attecott Picts ; Annandale, Nithsdale, and Strathclyde by Britons, Cymri, or 
Welshmen. ... In the sixth century, then, there were four races contending for what 
was formerly the Roman province of Valencia — (1) the Britons, Cymri, or Welsh, ancient 
subjects of Rome, who may be regarded as the legitimate inhabitants ; (2) the Northern and 

The Scots and Picts 213 

Southern Picts, representing the older or Goidelic strain of Celts, with an admixture, per- 
haps, of aboriginal Ivernians, with whom may be associated the Attecott Picts west of the 
Nith ; (3) the Scots from Erin, also Goidelic, but distinct from the Picts, not yet firmly set- 
tled in Lorn and Argyle under ^Edan, the [great-] grandson of Fergus Mor Mac Eire, but 
making descents wherever they could find a footing, and destined to give their name to Alban 
in later centuries as "Scotland " ; and (4) the Teutonic colonists. — Herbert Maxwell, History 
of Dumfries and Galloway \ pp. 32, 33. 

I Celtic Scotland, vol. i., p. 163. 

8 " Alban, or, as we now call it, Scotland, had by this time resolved itself into four domin- 
ions, each under its separate line of kings. The Picts held the country north of the Forth, 
their chief town being near the mouth of the Ness ; Argyle and Lorn formed the kingdom of 
Dalriada, populated by the Scottish (that is, Irish) descendants of the colony of Fergus Mor. 
The British kingdom of Alclut or Strathclyde was the northern portion of the Cymric terri- 
tory, or old Wales, once extending from Cornwall to Dunbarton, but permanently severed 
first by the Saxon king, Ceawlin, who in 577 took possession of the country round Bath and 
Gloucester ; and second by Edwin, King of Bernicia, at the great battle of Chester, in 613. 
Strathclyde, then, comprised a tract extending from the Derwent in Cumberland to Loch 
Lomond, the capital being called in Welsh Alclut, or the cliff on the Clyde, but known to 
the Dalriadic and Pictish Gaels as dun Bretann, the fort of the Welshmen. 

" On the east the Saxon realm of Bernicia stretched from the Humber to the Forth under 
King Edwin, who has left his name in Edinburgh, the Saxon title of the town which the 
Gaels called Dunedin, but whose seat of rule was Bamborough. Just as the territory of the 
Attecott Picts was separated from Strathclyde by the rampart now known as the De'il's Dyke, 
so Bernicia was separated from Strathclyde by the Catrail, an earthwork crossing the upper 
part of Liddesdale. Besides these four realms there was a debatable strip of country between 
the Lennox Hills and the Grampians, including the carse of Stirling and part of Linlithgow- 
shire, chiefly inhabited by the Southern Picts or Picts of Manau ; and lastly, the old territory 
of the Niduarian or Attecott Picts, who had managed to retain autonomy under native princes, 
and a degree of independence, by means of powerful alliances. 

" At the beginning of the seventh century, then, Dumfriesshire was under the rule of the 
Welsh kings of Strathclyde, while Wigtonshire and Kirkcudbright, soon to acquire the name 
of Galloway, were under their native Pictish princes." — Maxwell, History of Dumfries and 
Galloway, pp. 35, 36. 

9 A. d. 629, Cath Fedhaeoin in quo Maelcaith mac Scandail Rex Cruithnin victor erat. 
Concad Cer Rex Dalriada cecidit et Dicuill mac Eachach Rex Ceneoil Cruithne cecedit et 
nepotes Aidan, id est, Regullan mac Conaing et Failbe mac Eachach (et Osseric mac Albruit 
cum strage maxima suorum). Eochadh Buidhi mac Aidan victor erat.— Tighernac. 

10 Celtic Scotland, vol. i., p. 242. 

II In the same year in which the battle was fought which placed Osuald on the throne of 
Bernicia, Domnall Brecc, king of the Scots of Dalriada, appears to have made an attempt to 
wrest the district between the Avon and the Pentland Hills from the Angles, whether as 
having some claim to it through his grandfather, Aidan, or what is more probable, as a leader 
of the Britons, is uncertain. — Celtic Scotland, vol. i., p. 247. 

12 " In the centre of Scotland, where it is intersected by the two arms of the sea, the 
Forth and the Clyde, and where the boundaries of these four kingdoms approach one another, 
is a territory extending from the Esk to the Tay, which possessed a very mixed population, 
and was the scene of most of the conflicts between these four states. Originally occupied by 
the tribe of the Damnonii, the northern boundary of the Roman province intersected it for 
two centuries and a half, including part of this tribe and the province, and merging the rest 
among the barbarians. On the fall of the Roman power in Britain, it was overrun by the 
Picts, and one of the earliest settlements of the Saxons, which probably was composed of 
Frisians, took place in the districts about the Roman wall. It was here that, during the 

214 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

sixth century, the main struggle took place. It falls naturally into three divisions. The first 
extends from the Esk and the Pentland Hills to the Roman wall and the river Carron. 
This district we find mainly peopled by Picts, the remains probably of those who once occu- 
pied the eastern districts to the southern wall, and preserved a kind of independence, while 
the rest were subjected by the Angles. 

1 • From the Picts the Angles give the hills which formed its southern boundary the name 
of the Pehtland, now Pentland Hills. Near its southeastern boundary was the strong natu- 
ral position called by the Britons Mynyd Agned and also Dineiddyn, and by the Gaels Dun- 
edin. Nine miles farther west, the Firth of Forth is narrowed till the coast approaches to 
within two miles of that of Fife, and affords a ready means of access ; and on the south shore 
of the upper basin of the Forth, and near the termination of the Roman wall, was the ancient 
British town of Caeredin, while in the Forth itself opposite this district was the insular town 
of Guidi. The western part of this territory was known to the Welsh by the name of Manau 
Guotodin, and to the Gael as the plain or district of Manann, a name still preserved in Sli- 
abhmanann, now Slamanan, and this seems to have been the headquarters of these Picts. 

" Between them and the kingdom of the Picts proper lay a central district, extending 
from the wall to the river Forth, and on the bank of the latter was the strong position after- 
wards occupied by Stirling Castle ; and while the Angles of Bernicia exercised an influence 
and a kind of authority over the first district, this central part seems to have been more 
closely connected with the British kingdom of Alclyde. The northern part, extending from 
the Forth to the Tay, belonged to the Pictish kingdom, with whom its population, originally 
British, appears to have been incorporated, and was the district afterwards known as Fortrein 
and Magh Fortren. 

" Finally, on the north shore of the Solway Firth, and separated from the Britons by the 
lower part of the river Nith, and by the mountain range which separates the counties of 
Kirkcudbright and Wigton from those of Dumfries and Ayr, were a body of Picts, termed 
by Bede Niduari ; and this district, consisting of the two former counties, was known to the 
Welsh as Galwydel, and to the Irish as Gallgaidel, from which was formed the name Gall- 
weithia, now Galloway." — Celtic Scotland, vol. i., pp. 237-239. See Note 6, p. 192. 

13 During these wars there appears to have been hitherto a combination of the Britons of 
Alclyde and the Scots of Dalriada against the Angles and the Pictish population subject to 
them. It was, in fact, a conflict of the western tribes against the eastern, and of the 
Christian party against the pagan and semi-pagan, their common Christianity forming a strong 
bond of union between the two former nations, and after the death of Rhydderch Hael in 
603 the Dalriadic kings seem to have taken the lead in the command of the combined 
forces. — Celtic Scotland, vol. i., p. 249. 

14 Oswy . . . held the same dominions for some time, and for the most part subdued 
and made tributary the nations of the Picts and Scots, which possess the northern parts 
of Britain : but of these hereafter. — Bede, book ii., ch. v. 

15 The same King Oswy governed the Mercians, as also the people of the other 
southern provinces, three years after he had slain King Penda ; and he likewise subdued the 
greater part of the Picts to the dominion of the English. — Bede, book iii., ch. xxiv. 

The Scots of Dalriada naturally fell under his [Oswiu's] dominion along with the Britons, 
and we have the testimony of Adamnan that they were trodden down by strangers during the 
same period. But while these nations became tributary to the Angles during this period of 
thirty years, the mode in which the kings of Northumbria dealt with the Picts shows that 
their dominion over them was of a different kind, and that they viewed that part of the nation 
which was subject to them as now forming part of the Northumbrian kingdom. The way 
for this was prepared by the accession of Talorcan, son of Ainfrait, to the throne of the 
Picts on the death of Talore, son of Wid, or Ectolairg mac Foith, as Tighernac calls him, in 
653. Talorcan was obviously the son of that Ainfrait, the son of ^Edilfrid, and elder 
brother of Osuald, who on his father's death had taken refuge with the Picts, and his son 

The Scots and Picts 215 

Talorcan must have succeeded to the throne through a Pictish mother. At the time, then, 
when Oswiu thus extended his sway over the Britons and Scots there was a king of the Anglic 
race by paternal descent actually reigning over the Picts. Tighernac records his death in 
657, and Bede tells us that within three years after he had slain King Penda, Oswiu subjected 
the greater part of the Picts to the dominion of the Angles. It is probable, therefore, that 
he claimed their submission to himself as the cousin and heir on the paternal side of their 
king Talorcan, and enforced his claim by force of arms. How far his dominion extended 
it is difficult to say, but it certainly embraced, as we shall see, what Bede calls the province 
of the Picts on the north side of the Firth of Forth, and, nominally at least, may have in- 
cluded the whole territory of the Southern Picts ; while Gartnaid, the son of Donnell, or 
Domhnaill, who appears in the Pictish Chronicle as his successor, and who from the form of 
his father's name must have been of pure Gaelic race, ruled over those who remained 
independent. — Celtic Scotland, vol. i., pp. 257-258. 

16 In the first years of his [Ecgfrid's] reign the bestial people of the Picts, despising their 
subjection to the Saxons, and threatening to throw off the yoke of servitude, collected to- 
gether innumerable tribes from the north, on hearing which Ecgfrid assembled an army, and 
at the head of a smaller body of troops advanced against this great and not easily discovered 
enemy, who were assembled under a formidable ruler called Bernaeth, and attacking them 
made so great a slaughter that two rivers were almost filled with their bodies. Those who 
fled were pursued and cut to pieces, and the people were again reduced to servitude, and 
remained under subjection during the rest of Ecgfrid's reign. — Eddi, Life of St. Wilfrid* 
ch. xix. (written before 731). 

11 In the meantime the little kingdom of Dalriada was in a state of complete disorgani- 
zation. We find no record of any real king over the whole nation of the Scots, but each separate 
tribe seems to have remained isolated from the rest under its own chief, while the Britons 
exercised a kind of sway over them, and, along with the Britons, they were under subjection 
to the Angles. — Celtic Scotland, vol. i., p. 263. 

18 A. D. 678, Interfectio generis Loairn itirinn, id est, Feachair fotai et Britones qui 
victores erant. — Tighernac. 

Bellum Duinlocho et bellum Liaccmaelain et Doirad Eilinn — Annals of Ulster. 

19 Bede, book iv., ch. xxvi. 

20 Brudei was paternally a scion of the royal House of Alclyde, his father Bili appearing 
in the Welsh genealogies annexed to Nennius as the son of Neithon and father of that 
Eugein who slew Domnall Brecc in 642. 

81 Book iii., ch. i. 

22 711, Congressio Brittonum et Dalriadha for Loirgeclat ibu Britones devicti. 717, 
Congressio Dalriada et Brittonum in lapide qui vocatur Minvircc et Britones devicti 
sunt. — Tighernac. 

23 Book v., ch. xxi. See p. 126. 

24 726, Nechtain mac Derili constringitur apud Druist regem. Dungal de regno 
ejectus est et Druist de regno Pictorum ejectus et Elphin pro eo regnat. Eochach mac 
Eachach regnare incipit. — Tighernac. 

25 697, Euchu nepos Domhnall jugulatus est. — Annals of Ulster. 

26 728, Cath Monaigh Craebi itir Piccardachaib fein (i. e. , between the Picts themselves), 
Aengus et Alpine issiat tuc in cath (fought that battle), et ro mebaigh ria (the victory was 
with) n Aengus et ro marbhadh mac Alpin andsin (and the son of Alpin was slain there) et ro 
gab Aengus nert (and Angus took his person). Cath truadh itir (an unfortunate battle be- 
tween the) Piccardachaebh ac Caislen Credhi et ro mebaigh ar in (and the victory was against 
the same), Alpin et ro bearadh a cricha et a daine de uile (and his territories and all his men 
were taken), et ro gab Nechtan mac Derili Righi na Picardach (lost the kingdom of the 
Picts). — Tighernac. The Ulster Annals add : " ubi Alpinus effugit." 

27 736, Aengus mac Fergusa rex Pictorum vastavit regiones Dailriata et obtinuit Dunad 

216 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

et compulsit Creich et duos filios Selbaiche catenis alligavit, id est, Dongal et Feradach, et 
Paulo post Brudeus mac Aengusa mic Fergusa obiit. — Tighernac. 

88 736, Bellum Cnuicc Coirpri i Calathros uc etar Linndu inter Dalriatai et Fortrenn 
et Talorgan mac Ferguso filium Ainbhceallach fugientum cum exercitu persequitur in qua 
congressione multi nobiles ceciderunt. — Annals of Ulster. 

99 One of the chronicles appears to have preserved the traditionary account of his death 
when it tells us that he was slain in Galloway, after he had destroyed it, by a single person 
who lay in wait for him in a thick wood overhanging the entrance of the ford of a river as he 
rode among his people. (Cesty fust tue en Goloway, com il le avoit destruyt, de un soul 
hom qi ly gayta en un espesse hoys en pendaunt al entree dun ge de un ryvere, com chevauch- 
eoit entre ses gentz. — Scala Chron.) The scene of his death must have been on the east side 
of Loch Ryan, where a stream falls into the loch, on the north side of which is the farm of 
Laight, and on this farm is a large upright pillar stone, to which the name of Laight Alpin, 
or the Grave of Alpin, is given. 

30 By the Picts, Simeon usually understands the Picts of Galloway, and this battle seems 
to have followed the attack upon them by Alpin and his Scots. 

31 750, Cath etir Pictones et Britones, id est a Talorgan mac Fergusa et a brathair et ar 
Piccardach imaille friss (and his brother and a slaughter of Picts with him). — Tighernac. 

750, Bellum inter Pictos et Brittonis, id est, Gueith Mocetauc et rex eorum Talorgan a 
Brittonibus occiditur. — An. Cam. 

32 756, Eadberht rex, xviii. anno regni sui et Unust rex Pictorum duxerunt exercitum ad 
urbem Alcluth. Ibique Brittones in deditionem receperunt prima die mensis Augusti. 
Decima autem die ejusdem mensis interiit exercitus pene omnis quem duxit. (Eadberhtus) 
de Ouania ad Niwanbirig, id est, ad novam civitatem. — Simeon of Durham. 

33 775. Pex Pictorum Cynoth ex voragine hujus coenulentis vitae eripitur. — Simeon of 

" After the death of Angus MacFergus, king of the Picts, who is stigmatized by a Saxon 
writer as 'a bloody tyrant,' the history of the succeeding period again becomes obscure. 
Bruidi, his brother, followed him on the throne, which, after the death of Bruidi, and an in- 
terval of fifteen years, during which it was again occupied in succession by two brothers, 
reverted once more to the family of Angus in the persons of his son and grandson — Constan- 
tine MacFergus, also probably a member of the same race, acquiring the supreme power 
towards the close of the century by driving out Conal MacTeige, who lost his life a few years 
later in Kintyre. The names of three kings of Dalriada attest the existence of the little 
kingdom, without throwing any further light upon its history, though from the character of a 
subsequent reference to Aodh, ' the Fair,' it may be conjectured that he was in some sense 
the restorer of the line of Kintyre. After the death of Doncorcin, the last of these three 
princes, which happened shortly after the accession of Constantine, no further mention of the 
province will be found in any of the Irish annals which have hitherto been published. 

" For thirty years and upwards, the supremacy of Constantine was undisputed, and he 
was succeeded upon his death by his brother Angus, his son Drost, and his nephew Eoganan 
in the same regular order which is subsequently observable amongst the early kings of Scot- 
land. His reign was unquestionably an era of considerable importance, tradition connecting 
it with the termination of the Pictish monarchy, and representing Constantine as the last of 
the Pictish kings — a tradition which must have owed its origin to a vague recollection of 
some momentous change about this period. He and his brother Angus are numbered most 
suspiciously amongst the immediate predecessors of Kenneth Mac Alpin in the ' Duan of 
Alban,' the oldest known genealogy of the early kings of Scotland ; whilst the name of Con- 
stantine, unknown amongst the paternal ancestry of Kenneth, was borne by his son and many 
of his race, who would thus appear to have looked for their title to the throne quite as much 
to their maternal as to their paternal line of ancestry — for the mother of Alpin, Kenneth's 
father, was traditionally a daughter of the House of Fergus. (Innes, book i., art. viii. Cale- 

The Scots and Picts 217 

donia, book ii., ch. vi., p. 302, note A, with other authorities cited by both.) The marriage of 
Kenneth's grandfather with a sister of Constantine and Angus rests solely on tradition, but 
it appears the most probable solution of his peaceful accession to the throne. The examples 
of Talorcan, son of Eanfred, perhaps also of his cousin Bruidi, son of Bili, which is a British 
name, shows that the alien extraction of the father was no bar to the succession of the son. 
Such a succession would be exactly in accordance with the old custom mentioned by Bede, 
that ' in cases of difficulty ' the female line was preferred to the male, i. e., a near connec- 
tion in the female line to a distant male heir. From not attending to the expression ' in 
cases of difficulty,' the sense of Bede's words has been often misinterpreted." — Scotland 
under her Early Kings, vol. i., pp. 18, 19. 

34 780, Elpin rex Saxonum moritur. — Annals of Ulster. 

86 789, Bellum inter Pictos ubi Conall mac Taidg victus est et evasit et Constantin victor 

790, Vel hie bellum Conall et Constantin secundum alios libros. — Annals of Ulster. 

86 Anno ab incarnatione Domini octingentesimo tricesimo quarto congressi sunt Scotti 
cum Pictis in sollempnitate Paschali. Et plures de nobilioribus Pictorum ceciderunt. Sicque 
Alpinus Rex Scottorum victor extitit, unde in superbiam elatus ab eis, altero concerto bello, 
tercio decimo kal. Augusti ejusdem anni a Pictis vincitur atque truncatur. — Chronicles of the 
Picts and Scots, p. 209. 

81 The Chronicle of Huntingdon tells us that Kynadius succeeded his father Alpin in 
his kingdom, and that in the seventh year of his reign, which corresponds with the year 839, 
while the Danish pirates, having occupied the Pictish shores, had crushed the Picts who were 
defending themselves, with a great slaughter, Kynadius, passing into their remaining terri- 
tories, turned his arms against them, and having slain many, compelled them to take flight, 
and was the first king of the Scots who acquired the monarchy of the whole of Alban, and 
ruled in it over the Scots. 

Cujus filius Kynadius successit in regno patris qui vii° regni sui anno, cum piratae Dano- 
rum, occupatis littoribus, Pictos sua defendentes, straga maxima pertrivissent, in reliquos 
Pictorum terminos transiens, arma vertit et multis occisis fugere compulit, sicque monarchiam 
totius Albanise, quae nunc Scotia dicitur, primus Scottorum rex conquisivit et in ea primo 
super Scottos regnavit. — Chronicles of the Picts and Scots, p. 209. 

38 Chronicles of the Picts and Scots, edited by Wm. F. Skene, pp. 9, 21, 65, 84, 102, 
1-3$, J 54» J 84, 361, 362 : E. W. Robertson, Scotland under her Early Kings, vol. i., pp. 

39 In the Tract of the Men of Alban we are told that " the armed muster of the Cineal 
Loam was seven hundred men ; but it is of the Airgialla that the seventh hundred is." — 
Chron. Picts and Scots, p. 313. This name (Airgialla) was therefore likewise applied to 
two districts whose people were subject to the Cineal Loam, and contributed one hundred 
men to their armed muster, and were probably the ' ' Comites " who fought along with 
Selbhac in 719. 

40 It is utterly impossible that the Picts could have been exterminated and their language 
eradicated by the broken remnants of the insignificant tribe of Kintyre, and it is equally im- 
probable that such a conquest, if it ever took place, should have escaped the notice of every 
contemporary writer. The Pictish name disappeared, but the Pictish people and their lan- 
guage remained as little influenced by the accession of Kenneth MacAlpin, apparently in 
right of his maternal ancestry, as they were at a later period by the failure of the male line of 
the same family in the person of Malcolm the Second, and by the similar accession, in right 
of his maternal ancestors, of a prince of the Pictish House of Athol. — Scotland under her 
Early Kings, vol. ii., p. 373. 

At this time the Picts were the chief power in Scotland ; but, like the Scots of Argyle, 
they were divided among themselves. . . . The Picts were rather living in a rude con- 
federacy than under a fixed monarchy ; and, besides the domestic feuds and broils incident to 

218 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

tribunal communities, the Britons, Picts, Saxons, Scots, and finally the Danes, carried on an 
intermissive warfare with one another, often showing little result. Throughout the seventh 
and eighth centuries, the first four tribes frequently met in deadly conflict on a sort of 
debatable land, extending from the river Forth to the river Almond, in the counties of Stir- 
ling and Linlithgow. This region seems to have been occupied by a mixed population of 
Picts, Angles, and Britons ; and here the chief tribes encountered each other, and fought most 
of their battles. — John Mackintosh, History of Civilization in Scotland, vol. i., p. in. 

41 See Note 33, p. 217. 

42 War was declared against the Picts ; and he [Kenneth] gathered his forces together, 
and made his way into the country. So furiously, then, did he rage not only against the men, 
but even the women and little ones, that he spared neither sex nor holy orders, but destroyed, 
with fire and sword, every living thing which he did not carry off with him. Afterwards, in the 
sixth year of his reign, when the Danish pirates had occupied the coast, and, while plundering 
the seaboard, had, with no small slaughter, crushed the Picts who were defending their lands 
Kenneth, likewise, himself also turned his arms against the remaining frontiers of the Picts, 
and, crossing the mountain range on their borders, to wit, the backbone of Albania, which is 
called Drumalban in Scottish, he slew many of the Picts, and put the rest to flight ; thus 
acquiring the sole sovereignty over both countries. But the Picts, being somewhat reinforced 
by the help of the Angles, kept harassing Kenneth for four years. Weakening them subse- 
quently, however, by unforeseen inroads and various massacres, at length, in the twelfth year 
of his reign, he engaged them seven times in one day, and swept down countless multitudes 
of the Pictish people. So he established and strengthened his authority thenceforth over the 
whole country from the river Tyne, beside Northumbria, to the Orkney Isles — as formerly 
St. Adamnan, the Abbot of Hy (Iona), had announced in his prophecy. Thus, not only were 
the kings and leaders of that nation destroyed, but we read that their stock and race, also, 
along with their language or dialect, were lost ; so that whatever of these is found in the 
writings of the ancients is believed by most to be fictitious or apocryphal. — John of For- 
dun's Chronicle , book iv., ch. iv. 

43 During the entire period of a century and a half which had now elapsed since the 
Northern Picts were converted to Christianity by the preaching of St. Columba (565), there is 
hardly to be found the record of a single battle between them and the Scots of Dalriada. 
Had they viewed each other as hostile races, it is difficult to account for the more powerful 
nation of the Picts permitting a small colony like the Scots of Dalriada to remain in undis- 
turbed possession of the western district where they had settled ; and prior to the mission of 
St. Columba we find the king of the Northern Picts endeavoring to expel them ; but after 
that date there existed a powerful element of peace and bond of union in the Columban 
Church. — Celtic Scotland, vol. i., p. 276. 

The Scottish clergy, no doubt, never lost the hope of regaining their position as the 
Church of Pictavia, and of recovering their possessions there. The occurrence of a Scottish 
prince having a claim to the Pictish crown by the Pictish law of succession, accompanied by 
the invasion of the Danes, and the crushing defeat sustained by the Pictish army which 
opposed them, probably afforded a favorable opportunity. — Skene, Introduction to John of 
Fordun's Chronicle, p. xlix. 

44 The causes of this revolution are obscure ; but the defeat of the Picts by the Danes 
(in 839) must have facilitated the accession of a king of Scottish descent ; and the natural 
outcome of the long struggle among the various tribes, which we dimly discern through the 
mist, had a tendency towards a greater concentration of power somewhere — one or other of 
the chief tribes would gradually obtain an ascendancy. It is to these circumstances we should 
look for an explanation of the foundation of the monarchy. Other explanations have been 
offered, such as royal marriages, the efforts of the Scots clergy, and so on, but none of them are 
satisfactory. It is safer, and probably nearer the truth, to rely on the accumulating force of the 
surrounding circumstances. — Mackintosh, History of Civilization in Scotland, vol. i., p. 112. 

The Scots and Picts 219 

46 " We cannot thoroughly understand the significance of the ascendancy so acquired by 
the kings of the Dalriadic race, without realizing to ourselves, what is not to be done at 
once, the high standard of civilization which separated the Scots of Ireland and Dalriada 
from the other nations inhabiting the British Isles. . . . We have no conspicuous memorials 
of such a social condition, such as the great buildings left by the Romans and the Normans. 
Celtic civilization took another and subtler, perhaps a feebler shape. It came out emphati- 
cally in dress and decoration. Among Irish relics there are many golden ornaments of 
exquisitely beautiful and symmetrical pattern. Of the trinkets too, made of jet, glass, orna- 
mental stone, and enamel, the remnants found in later times belong in so preponderating a 
proportion to Ireland, as to point to the centre of fashion whence they radiated being there. 
There seems to have been a good deal of what may be called elegant luxury : the great folks, 
for instance, lay or ecclesiastic, had their carriages and their yachts. Especially the shrines, 
the ecclesiastical vestments, and all the decorations devoted to religion were rich and beauti- 
ful. They had manuscripts beautifully written and adorned, which were encased in costly 
and finely worked bindings. It is to this honor done to sacred books, of which the finest 
specimens belong to Ireland, that we may attribute the medieval passion for rich bindings. 

" The high civilization of the Celtic Scots, indeed, was received with a becoming defer- 
ence all around. . . . Among the nations around, whether of Teutonic or Celtic origin, 
the civilization of the Scots, then a rising and strengthening civilization, raised them high in 
rank, and gives us reason to believe that the Picts, instead of mourning the loss of indepen- 
dence, felt their position raised by counting the Dalriadic sovereign as their own too." — 
Burton, History of Scotland, vol. i., pp. 294, 295, 297. 

46 Paulo post ab eo bello in xiiij ejus facto in Dolair inter DanariOs et Scottos. Occisi 
sunt Scotti co Ach Cochlam. — Pictish Chronicle. This is the first appearance in the Pictisk 
Chronicle of the term "Scotti" or Scots being applied to any portion of the inhabitants of 
Pictavia, and it seems to have been used with reference to those of the province of Fife in 
particular, but the Ulster Annals record the death of Constantine as king of the Picts. 

41 Eochodius autem filius Run regis Britannorum nepos Cinadei ex filia regnavit annis xi. 
Licet Ciricium filium alii dicunt hie regnasse ; eo quod alumpnus ordinatorque Eochodio 
fiebat. — Pictish Chronicle. 

48 In their hands he becomes Gregorius Magnus, or Gregory the Great, and in his person 
restores the true line of Scots royalty, which had been perverted to serve the claims of power- 
ful collaterals. He is the great hero-king of his age. He drives out the Danes, he humbles 
England, he conquers Ireland ; but his magnanimity will permit him to take no more advan- 
tage of his success than to see that these two kingdoms are rightly governed, that they are rid 
of the northern invaders, and that their sceptres are respectively wielded by the legitimate 
heir. All this is just about as true as the story of the king of Scotland with five royal com- 
panions rowing the barge of King Edgar in the Dee. When the two countries afterwards 
had their bitter quarrel, such inventions were the way in which the quarrel was fought in the 
cloister. — Burton, History of Scotland, vol. i., p. 331. 

49 See Chronicles of the Picts and Scots, pp. 9, 209 ; Robertson's Scotland under her 
Early Kings, vol. i., pp. 54, 55; Celtic Scotland, vol. i., p. 335. 

" Though we know less of his diplomacy in the states to the northward of the Danelaw, 
we can see that Alfred was busy both with Bernicia and the kingdom of the Scots. The es- 
tablishment of the Danelaw in Mid-Britain, the presence of the pirates in Caithness and the 
Hebrides, made these states his natural allies ; for, pressed as they were by the vikings 
alike from the north and from the south, their only hope of independent existence lay in the 
help of Wessex. Of the first state we know little. The wreck of Northumbria had given 
freedom to the Britons of Strathclyde, to whom the name of Cumbrians is from this time 
transferred. The same wreck restored to its old isolation the kingdom of Bernicia. Deira 
formed part of the Danelaw, but the settlement of the Danes did not reach beyond the Tyne, 
for Bernicia, ravaged and plundered as it had been, still remained English, and governed, as 

220 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

it would seem, by the stock of its earlier kings. The weakness of this state drew it to Alfred's 
side ; and we know that the Bernician ruler, Eadwulf of Bamborough, was Alfred's friend. 

" The same dread of the Danes drew to him the kingdom of the Scots. The Scot king- 
dom, which at its outset lurked almost unseen among the lakes of Argyle, now embraced the 
whole of North Britain, from Caithness to the firths, for the very name of the Picts had dis- 
appeared at a moment when the power of the Picts seemed to have reached its height. The 
Pictish kingdom had risen fast to greatness after the victory of Nechtansmere in 685. In the 
century which followed Ecgfrith's defeat, its kings reduced the Scots of Dalriada from nomi- 
nal dependence to actual subjection ; the annexation of Angus and Fife carried their eastern 
border to the sea, while to the south their alliance with the Northumbrians in the warfare 
which both waged on the Welsh extended their bounds on the side of Cumbria or Strath- 
clyde. But the hour of Pictish greatness was marked by the extinction of the Pictish name. 
In the midst of the ninth century the direct line of their royal house came to an end, and the 
under-king of the Scots of Dalriada, Kenneth MacAlpin, ascended the Pictish throne in right 
of his maternal descent. For fifty years more Kenneth and his successors remained kings of 
the Picts. At the moment we have reached, however, the title passed suddenly away, the 
tribe which had given its chief to the throne gave its name to the realm, and ' Pict-land ' 
disappeared from history to make room first for Alban or Albania, and then for ' the land of 
the Scots."' — Green, Conquest of England ', ch. iv., sees. 39, 40. 

60 A. D. 900, Domhnall mac Constantin Ri Alban moritur. — Annals of Ulster. 

61 English Chronicle, Anno 926. See p. 

62 The men of the northern Danelaw found themselves backed not only by their brethren 
from Ireland, but by the mass of states around them — by the English of Bernicia, by the 
Scots under Constantine, by the Welshmen of Cumbria or Strathclyde. It is the steady recur- 
rence of these confederacies which makes the struggle so significant. The old distinctions 
and antipathies of race must have already, in great part, passed away before peoples so diverse 
could have been gathered into one host by a common dread of subjection, and the motley 
character of the army pointed forward to that fusion of both Norman and Briton in the gen- 
eral body of the English race, which was to be the work of the coming years. — Green, 
Conquest of England, ch. v., sec. 42. 

63 Deinde hostes subegit, Scotiam usque Dunfoeder et Wertermorum terrestri exercitu 
vastavit, navali vero usque Cateness depopulatus est. — Simeon of Durham, di Gestis Reg. 
Fugato deinde Owino rege Cumbrorum et Constantino rege Scotorum, terrestri et navali ex- 
ercitu Scotiam sibi subjugando perdomuit. — Simeon of Durham, Ecclesiastical History of 
Durham. See also English Chronicle, Anno 933. 

64 Florence of Worcester, Anno 937; the Egill's Saga; Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, Anno 
937 ; Simeon of Durham says, in his History of the Kings, that " iEthelstan fought at Wen- 
dune, and put King Oulaf with six hundred and fifteen ships, Constantin, king of the Scots, 
and the king of the Cumbrians with all their forces, to flight." And in his History of the 
Church of Durham he says : " ^thelstan fought at Weondune, which is also called Aetbrun- 
nanmere or Brunnanbyrig, against Oulaf, the son of Guthred, the late king, who had arrived 
with a fleet of six hundred and fifteen ships, supported by the auxiliaries of the kings recently 
spoken of, that is to say, of the Scots and Cumbrians." 

65 In 945 Eadmund conquered Cumberland. It might not be easy to say exactly what 
territory is meant by that name ; but it was clearly the whole or a part of the ancient Strath- 
clyde. This territory Eadmund bestowed on Malcolm, king of Scots, distinctly as a territorial 
fief. . . . The northern kingdom of the Britons now became the ordinary appanage of 
the heirs of the Scottish crown . . . and soon after the Scottish kings themselves made 
their way south of the Forth. In the reign of Eadred, Edinburgh, the border fortress of 
Northumberland to the north, became a Scottish possession ... it was the beginning of 
the process which brought the lands between Forth and Tweed into the possessions of the 
Scottish kings, and which thereby turned them into English kings of a Northern England, 

The Scots and Picts 221 

which was for a while more English than the southern England itself. — Freeman's Sketch of 
English History. 

66 Chronicles of the Picts and Scots, pp. 10, 151, 174, 302. 

67 Chronicles of the Picts and Scots, p. 10. 

68 He is the same Domnaldus who was king of the Cumbrians when Eadmund ravaged 
the country in 945, and was the son of that Eugenius, king of the Cumbrians, who fought in 
the battle of Brunanburgh. 

975, Domnallmac Eoain Ri Bretain in ailitri. — Tighernac. 

974, Dun walla wn, King of Strathclyde, went on a pilgrimage to Rome (Brut y 
Tywysogion). — Chronicles of the Picts and Scots, pp. 77, 124. 

69 In the north the settlement effected by Eadmund still held good, in spite of a raid into 
which the Scots seem to have been tempted by a last rising of the Danelaw. The bribe of 
the Cumbrian realm sufficed to secure the Scot king as a fellow-worker with Eadgar, as effec- 
tively as it had secured him as a fellow-worker with Eadmund, while a fresh bond was added 
by the cession during this reign of the fortress of Edinburgh with the district around it, along 
with the southern shore of the Forth, to the Scottish king. — Green, Conquest of England, ch. 
vii., sec. 12. 

60 Interfectus est a suis hominibus in Fotherkern per perfidiam Finvelae flliae Cunchar 
comitis de Engus, cujus Finvelae unicum filium predictus Knyeth interfecit apud Dunsinoen. 
— Chronicles of the Picts and Scots, pp. 175, 289. 

61 A.D. 997, Maelcolaim mac Domnall Ri Breatan Tuaiscert moritur. — Tighernac. 
"See note 1, Chapter XX. 

63 Fordun, book iv., ch. xli. Malcolm appears to have died in 1029 and to have then 
been succeeded by another Malcolm — so at least the Danish authorities tell us ; but the Scots' 
chronicles give the whole of the period of the united reigns to one Malcolm ; and in using any 
lights they give us, it is necessary to speak of them as one, since there are no means of sepa- 
rating their two reputations. It was the younger Malcolm, however, according to the same 
authorities, who was the son of Kenneth, — the other, who had the longer reign, being called 
" Mac Malbrigid Mac Ruaidhri." — Burton, History of Scotland, vol. i., p. 341. This theory 
was first suggested by Skene in his Highlanders of Scotland, published in 1837, but was after- 
wards considered by him to be untenable (Celtic Scotland, vol. i., p. 400). See p. 238. 

64 Chronicles of the Picts and Scots, p. 366. 

66 A comet appeared for thirty nights to the people of Northumbria, a terrible 
presage of the calamity by which that province was about to be desolated. For, shortly af- 
terwards (that is, after thirty days), nearly the whole population, from the river Tees to the 
Tweed and their borders, were cut off in a conflict in which they were engaged with a count- 
less multitude of Scots at Carrun. — Simeon of Durham, Ecclesiastical History of Durham, 
ch. v. 

1018, a great battle was fought at Carham between the Scots and the English, between 
the son of Waltheof, earl of the Northumbrians, and Malcolm, the son of Kenneth, king of 
the Scots ; with whom in battle was Owen the Bald, king of the Clutinians. — Simeon of 
Durham, Hist. Reg. 

Which [Uchtred] being slain [by King Cnut] his brother Eadulf, surnamed Cudel, 
very slothful and timid, succeeded him in comitatum. But fearing lest the Scots should re- 
venge upon him the death of those whom his brother, as is above said, had slain, gave all Lo- 
thian for satisfaction and firm concord. In this manner was Lothian added to the kingdom of 
the Scots. — Simeon De Obsess. Dun. 

We have the authority of the Saxon Chronicle for the fact that Uchtred was slain two years 
before and that Cnut had made Eric, a Dane, his successor, while Simeon makes his brother, 
Eadulf Cudel, succeed him. — Celtic Scotland, vol. i., p. 393. 

66 English Chronicle, Anno 945. See p. 300. 

67 Orkneyinga Saga, Collectanea de Rebus Albanicis, pp. 340, 346. See Appendix P. 

222 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

68 The same Finleikr who appears in Tighernac as Findlaec mac Ruaidhri, Mormaer 
Moreb, and in the Ulster Annals as " Ri Alban," indicating that he claimed a position of 
independence both from the earls of Orkney and the kings of the Scots. — Celtic Scotland, 
p. 389. 

69 Fordun says, " cousin." 

70 He was, however, murdered through the wickedness of a family, the murderers of both 
his grandfather and great-grandfather, the head of which was Machabeus, son of Finele, by 
whom he was privily wounded unto death at Bothgofnane ; and, being carried to Elgin, he 
died there, and was buried, a few days after, in the island of Iona. — Fordun, book iv., 
ch. xliv. 

71 Innes, Ap. 4. Sim., Hist. Dun., i., 3, c. 5, 6 ; Ibid., De Obs. Dun., p. 81 ; De Gestis, 
1018. On comparing the passages of Simeon it is impossible to doubt that the cession of 
Lothian by Eadulf Cudel was the result of the battle of Carham, though there is an evident 
reluctance in the English chronicler to allude to the defeat and its consequences. The men 
of the Lothians, according to Wallingford, retained their laws and customs unaltered, and 
though the authority is questionable, the fact is probably true, for Lothian law became eventu- 
ally the basis of Scottish law. Conquest indeed in these times did not alter the laws and 
customs of the conquered, unless where they come into contact and into opposition with those 
of the conquerors, and the men of the Lothians remained under the Scottish kings in much 
the same position as the men of Kent under the kings of Mercia and Wessex, probably 
exchanging the condition of a harassed for that of a favored frontier province. — Scotland 
under her Early Kings, vol. i., p. 96. 

72 The Firth of Forth. 

73 Scotland had now reached her permanent and lasting frontier towards the south, the 
dependent principality of Strathclyde, having, apparently, during the course of this reign, 
been finally incorporated with the greater kingdom. When Donald, son of the Eogan who 
shared in the bloody fight of Brunanburgh, died on a pilgrimage in 975, he seems to have been 
succeeded by his son Malcolm, whose death is noticed by the Irish Tighernac under the date 
of 997. The last king of Strathclyde, who has found a place in history, is Eogan " the 
Bald," who fought by the side of the Scottish king at Carham, probably a son of the British 
Malcolm whose family name he bears ; and in the person of this Eogan the line of Aodh's 
son, Donald, appears to have become extinct. The earliest authorities of the twelfth century 
give the title of " king of the Cumbrians," meaning undoubtedly the northern Cumbria 
or Strathclyde, to Malcolm's grandson, Duncan, and it is probable that upon the failure 
of the line of Scoto-British princes, the King of Scotland placed his grandson over the prov- 
ince, which from that time, losing the last semblance of independence, ceased to be ruled by 
a separate line of princes. — Robertson, Scotland under her Early Kings, vol. i., p. 98. 

" We have already seen how the political relations of the Scots with their southern neigh- 
bors had been affected by the action of the Danes. Pressed between the Norse jarls settled in 
Caithness and the Danelaw of Central England, the Scot kings were glad to welcome the 
friendship of Wessex ; but with the conquest by the house of Alfred of the Danelaw, and the 
extension of the new English realm to their own southern border, their dread of English 
ambition became in its turn greater than their dread of the Dane. In the battle of Brunan- 
burgh the Scot king, Constantine, fought side by side with the Northmen against yEthelstan. 
Eadmund's gift of southern Cumbria showed the price which the English kings set upon Scot- 
tish friendship. The district was thenceforth held by the heir of the Scottish crown, and for 
a time at least the policy of conciliation seems to have been successful, for the Scots proved 
Eadred's allies in his wars with Northumbria. But even as allies they were still pressing 
southward on the English realm. Across the Forth lay the English Lowlands, that northern 
Bernicia which had escaped the Danish settlement that changed the neighboring Deira into a 
part of the Danelaw. It emerged from the Danish storm as English as before, with a line of 
native ealdormen who seem to have inherited the blood of its older kings. Harassed as the 

The Scots and Picts 223 

land had been, and changed as it was from the Northumbria of Baeda or Cuthbert, Bernicia 
was still a tempting bait to the clansmen of the Scottish realm. 

"One important post was already established on Northumbrian soil. Whether by 
peaceful cession on Eadred's part or no, the border fortress of Edinburgh passed during his 
reign into Scottish hands. It is uncertain if the grant of Lothian by Eadgar followed the 
acquisition of Edinburgh ; but at the close of his reign the southward pressure of the Scots 
was strongly felt. ' Raids upon Saxony ' are marked by the Pictish Cronicle among the 
deeds of King Kenneth ; and amidst the troubles of yEthelred's reign a Scottish host swept 
the country to the very gates of Durham. But Durham was rescued by the sword of Uhtred, 
and the heads of the slain marauders were hung by their long, twisted hair round its walls. 
The raid and the fight were memorable as the opening of a series of descents which were 
from this time to form much of the history of the north. Cnut was hardly seated on the 
throne when in 1018 the Scot king, Malcolm, made a fresh inroad on Northumbria, and the 
flower of its nobles fell fighting round Earl Eadwulf in a battle at Carham, on the Tweed. . . . 

" Few gains have told more powerfully on the political character of a kingdom than this. 
King of western Dalriada, king of the Picts, lord of Cumbria, the Scot king had till now 
been ruler only of Gaelic and Cymric peoples. ' Saxony,' the land of the English across the 
Forth, had been simply a hostile frontier — the land of an alien race — whose rule had been 
felt in the assertion of Northumbrian supremacy and West-Saxon over-lordship. Now for 
the first time Malcolm saw Englishmen among his subjects. Lothian, with its Northumbrian 
farmers and seamen, became a part of his dominion. And from the first moment of its sub- 
mission it was a most important part. The wealth, the civilization, the settled institutions, 
the order of the English territory won by the Scottish king, placed it at the head of the Scot- 
tish realm. The clans of Kintyre or of the Highlands, the Cymry of Strathclyde, fell into 
the background before the stout farmers of northern Northumbria. The spell drew the Scot 
king, in course of time, from the very land of the Gael. Edinburgh, an English town in the 
English territory, became ultimately his accustomed seat. In the midst of an English district 
the Scot kings gradually ceased to be the Gaelic chieftains of a Gaelic people. The process 
at once began which was to make them Saxons, Englishmen in tongue, in feeling, in tendency, 
in all but blood. Nor was this all. The gain of Lothian brought them into closer political 
relations with the English crown. The loose connection which the king of Scots and Picts 
had acknowledged in owning Eadward the Elder as father and lord, had no doubt been drawn 
tighter by the fealty now owed for the fief of Cumbria. But Lothian was English ground, 
and the grant of Lothian made the Scot king * man ' of the English king for that territory, as 
Earl Eadwulf was Cnut's ' man ' for the land to the south of it. Social influences, political 
relations, were henceforth to draw the two realms together ; but it is in the cession of Lothian 
that the process really began." — Green, Conquest of England, ch. ix., sees. 38-40. 

It should be borne in mind that Mr. Green writes from the customary English point of 
view in stating that the conquest of Lothian by Malcolm made the Scottish kings the liege 
men of the rulers of England. Scottish historians contend that the record of their king 
having acknowledged Eadward the Elder as " father and lord" is a fabricated one ; and the 
evidence seems to be with them. See p. 359. 



OF the Romanized Britons after the departure of the imperial legions in 
the early part of the fifth century, we have no definite record until the 
time of Gildas, 1 who wrote about 556. His description of the conquest of the 
island by the Saxons is more particularly confined to the events which took 
place in Kent. However, he gives a brief account of the inhabitants " between 
the Walls," and of their weak and inadequate defence against the Picts and 
Scots.* The legendary accounts of the battles of King Arthur with the Sax- 
ons, as given in the compilation of Nennius, while no doubt to a certain degree 
mythical, at least show us that the portion of Britain with which Arthur's 
name and achievements were earliest connected was not within the bounds 
of the present Wales ; but in the vicinity of Carlisle, and to a great extent 
north of Solway Firth. These accounts of Nennius are as follows : 

§ 38. Hengist, after this, said to Vortigern, " I will be to you both a 
father and an adviser ; despise not my counsels, and you shall have no rea- 
son to fear being conquered by any man or any nation whatever ; for the 
people of my country are strong, warlike, and robust : if you approve, I will 
send for my son and his brother, both valiant men, who at my invitation will 
fight against the Scots, and you can give them the countries in the north, 
near the wall called Gual [Antoninus's wall]." The incautious sovereign hav- 
ing assented to this, Octa and Ebusa arrived with forty ships. In these they 
sailed round the country of the Picts, laid waste the Orkneys, and took 
possession of many regions, even to the Pictish confines. . . . 

§ 50. St. Germanus, after Vortigern's death, returned into his own 
country. At that time the Saxons greatly increased in Britain, both in 
strength and numbers. And Octa, after the death of his father Hengist, 
came from the sinistral part of the island to the kingdom of Kent, and from 
him have proceeded all the kings of that province, to the present period. 

Then it was that the magnanimous Arthur, with all the kings and mili- 
tary force of Britain, fought against the Saxons. And though there were 
many more noble than himself, yet he was twelve times chosen their com- 
mander, and was as often conqueror. The first battle in which he was 
engaged was at the mouth of the river Gleni. The second, third, fourth and 
fifth, were on another river, by the Britons called Dubglas, in the region 
Linnius. The sixth on the river Bassas. The seventh in the wood Celidon, 
which the Britons call Cat Coit Celidon. The eighth was near Guinnion 
Castle, where Arthur bore the image of the Holy Virgin, mother of God, 
upon his shoulders, and through the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the 
holy Mary, put the Saxons to flight, and pursued them the whole day with 
great slaughter. The ninth was at the city of Legion, which is called Cair 
Lion. The tenth was on the banks of the river Tribruit. The eleventh was 
on the mountain Breguoin, which we call Agned. The twelfth was a most 
severe contest, when Arthur penetrated to the hill of Badon. In this engage- 
ment, nine hundred and forty fell by his hand alone, no one but the Lord 


The Britons 225 

affording him assistance. In all these engagements the Britons were suc- 
cessful. For no strength can avail against the will of the Almighty. 

The more the Saxons were vanquished, the more they sought for new 
supplies of Saxons from Germany ; so that kings, commanders, and military 
bands were invited over from almost every province. And this practice they 
continued till the reign of Ida, who was the son of Eoppa ; he, of the Saxon 
race, was the first king of Bernicia, and in Cair Ebrauc [York]. 

The " river Gleni " has been usually identified with the Glen, a river in 
the northern part of Northumberland ; the " Dubglas, in the region of 
Linnius," with the two streams called Douglas, or Dubhglass, in Lennox, 
which fall into Loch Lomond, and also with the Dunglas, which formed 
the southern boundary of Lothian ; the Bassas, with an isolated rock in the 
Firth of Forth, near the town of North Berwick, called " The Bass " ; the 
" wood Celidon," with the Caledonian forest ; the fastness of " Guinnion," 
with the church of Wedale, in the vale of the Gala Water ; the mount 
called " Agned " with Edinburgh. In the chronicle attached to Nennius, 
Arthur is said to have been slain at the battle of Camlan in 537, in which he 
fought Medraud. This Medraud was the son of Lieu of Lothian. It is true, 
Mr. Guest has located the sites of many of these battles in the south ; but 
the preponderance of evidence favors the northern localities as given above. 3 

The Arthurian romances, which appeared at a later date than the Nen- 
nius fragments, also pertain largely to Arthur's adventures in the north, and 
this to a far greater extent than is generally realized, even by those who are 
familiar with that romantic literature. 4 

The district in Scotland occupied by the Britons at this time comprised 
all that part of the country between the Clyde and the Solway lying west of 
the Esk, 6 excepting that southern portion west of the Nith, occupied in 
Ptolemy's time by the Novantae, the supposed progenitors of the Niduarian 
or Galloway Picts. Later, the British territory was reduced through the 
partial subjugation of Galloway by the Northumbrians, mention of which 
is made as early as 750/ During the next hundred years, probably about 
the time of Kenneth MacAlpin's accession to the Pictish throne, 843-44, there 
seem also to have been settlements made by the Irish or Dalriada Scots or 
Picts along the western and southern coasts of Galloway. 7 

Ida, the Angle, who built the strong citadel of Bamborough, on the 
northeast coast of England in 547, reigned over Bernicia for twelve years/ 
His successors are described by Nennius as follows : 

§ 6$. Adda, son of Ida, reigned eight years ; Ethelric, son of Adda, 
reigned four years. Theodoric, son of Ida, reigned seven years. Freothwulf 
reigned six years ; in whose time the kingdom of Kent, by the mission of 
Gregory, received baptism. Hussa reigned seven years. Against him 
fought four kings, Urien, and Ryderchen, and Guallauc, and Morcant. 
Theodoric fought bravely, together with his sons, against that Urien. But 
at that time sometimes the enemy and sometimes our countrymen were de- 
feated, and he shut them up three days and three nights in the island of 

226 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

Metcaut ; and whilst he was on an expedition he was murdered, at the in- 
stance of Morcant, out of envy, because he possessed so much superiority- 
over all the kings in military science. Eadfered Flesaurs reigned twelve 
years in Bernicia, and twelve others in Deira, and gave to his wife, Bebba, 
the town of Dynguoaroy, which from her is called Bebbanburg 9 [Bam- 

The British king, Ryderchen (or Rhydderch) mentioned in this passage, 
fought a great battle against some of the other Welsh I0 chiefs in 573, at 
Arddyred (now Arthuret) on the river Esk, about eight miles north of Car- 
lisle. 11 Rhydderch was victorious, and became sovereign ruler of all the 
northern Britons, with his capital established at Alclyde. 18 Adamnan, who 
was born in 624, mentions him in his Life of Columba" as Rodericus, son of 
Tothail, who reigned at the rock of Cluaithe (Petra-Cloithe, Alclyde, or 
Dumbarton.) 14 Adamnan states also that Rhydderch was a friend and cor- 
respondent of St. Columba. His death is said to have occurred in 603." 

In 642, the Annals of Tighernac record the killing of Domnall Brecc, 
king of the Dalriad Scots, at Strathcawin, by Oan (Owen, or Eugein), king of 
the Britons. 16 

In 654, Oswiu, King of Bernicia, defeated the Britons and Mercians, under 
the command of Penda the Mercian king, in a battle fought in Lothian, and 
thus obtained supremacy over the Strathclyde people. Their subjection to 
the Angles continued for about thirty years, until the disastrous defeat and 
death of Ecgfrid at Nechtansmere (Dunnichen) in 685. 1T In the year 658, 
the Ulster Annals record the death of Guiret, King of Alclyde. There is 
then an interval of thirty-six years before another death record appears. In 
694, Tighernac mentions the death of Domnall mac Avin, King of Alclyde, 
whom Mr. Skene supposes to have been the son of that Owen who is said to 
have slain Domnall Brecc in 642. Domnall mac Avin was succeeded by 
Beli or Bili, son of Alpin, and grandson of the same Owen. In 752, Tigher- 
nac refers to the death of " Tuadar mac Bili Ri Alochlandaih " (Tuadubr, 
son of Bili, King of Alclyde). 18 Four years later, Eadberht, King of North- 
umbria, and Angus, King of the Picts, led an army to Alclyde, and there 
compelled the submission of the British. 19 

It is probable that Strathclyde remained under the rule of Northumbria 
for some time after this conquest. The Annals of Ulster record the burn- 
ing of Alclyde in the calends of January, 780 ; and in 828, King Ecgbryht is 
said to have overrun and subdued the North Welsh. 20 From that time there 
is but little record of the kingdom until nearly half a century later, when it 
again appears as the British kingdom of Strathclyde. In the year 872, the 
Ulster Annals inform us that Artgha, king of the Britons of Strathclyde^ 
was put to death, at the instigation of Constantine (son of Kenneth mac Al- 
pin), then king of the Picts. The descent of this Artgha from Dunnagual, 
whose death is recorded in 760, is given in the Welsh genealogies attached 
to Nennius. 

Simeon of Durham records the invasion of the Strathclyde district by the 

The Britons 227 

Danes in 875, under the leadership of Halfdan, who brought the whole of 
Northumbria under subjection, and destroyed great numbers of the Picts (of 
Galloway) and people of Strathclyde." Artgha left a son, Run, who suc- 
ceeded to the government, and married a daughter of Kenneth MacAlpin. 
On the death of Kenneth's son, Aedh, king of the Picts, in 878, Eocha, the 
son of Run, came to the throne of Alban, which he held for eleven years, 
having associated with him another Briton, Ciric, or Grig, the Gregory the 
Great of some of the later Scottish historians. During this reign a large 
party of the Britons are said to have left Strathclyde for the south and to 
have finally settled in Wales." Eocha and Grig seem to have ruled jointly 
for a time over Strathclyde and Pictland, until they were both expelled in 
889." They were succeeded by Donald in the sovereignty of Strathclyde. 
The latter died in 908." He is said by Skene to have been the last of the 
family claiming Roman descent which had hitherto given its kings to Al- 
clyde. Donald was succeeded by another Donald — a brother of Constantine 
II., King of Alban, and son to that Aedh mac Kenneth whose sister had 
married Run, the former King of Strathclyde. 

The next ruler of whom we have a record was Owen, or Eugenius, who 
is mentioned by Simeon of Durham, in connection with Constantine, King of 
Alban, as having been defeated by the Saxon ^Ethelstan in 934." He was 
the son of the same Donald who became king in 908. Owen's son, Donald, 
succeeded him, and was king in 945, when the kingdom was invaded and 
conquered by Eadmund, the Northumbrian ruler, who gave it up to Malcolm, 
king of the Scots." Donald, however, continued as the nominal ruler. He 
apparently recovered his independence after Malcolm's death, and reigned 
for upwards of thirty years. The Pictish Chronicle states that in 971, Cuil- 
ean, King of Alban, and his brother, Eochodius, or Eocha, were slain by the 
Britons, who were under the leadership of Ardach. Kenneth, Cuilean's suc- 
cessor, attempted to avenge the latter's death by laying waste the British ter- 
ritories ; but succeeded in doing this only after considerable loss to himself," 
and in the following year was obliged to fortify the fords of the river Forth 
in order to protect himself from the counter-attacks of the Britons. 

Tighernac records a pilgrimage made by Domnall, son of Eoain, king of 
the Britons, in 975, and the same event is mentioned in the British chronicle 
the Brut y Tywysogion, which calls him Dunwallaun, King of Strathclyde, 
and states that he went on a pilgrimage to Rome. Tighernac's record is 
followed by another in 997, mentioning the death in that year of Malcolm, 
son of Donald, and king of the northern Britons." Malcolm seems to have 
been succeeded by his brother, as the next reference to the Strathclyde kings 
mentions Owen (or Eugenius), surnamed The Bald, son of Domnall, as ruler 
in 10 1 8, in which year he fought with Malcolm, King of Alban, at the battle 
of Carham, against their common enemy, the Northumbrian Danes. On 
Owen's death in the same year," he was succeeded by Duncan, the grandson 
of the Scottish Malcolm. This Duncan on ascending the throne of Scotland 

228 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

in 1034 permanently united the kingdoms under a single ruler, and merged 
the two into one. 


1 The genuineness of Gildas, which has been doubted, may now be looked on as estab- 
lished (see Stubbs and Haddan, Councils of Britain, i., 44). Skene (Celtic Scotland, i., 116, 
note) gives a critical account of the various biographies of Gildas. He seems to have been 
born in 516, probably in the North- Welsh valley of the Clwyd ; to have left Britain for 
Armorica when thirty years old, or in 546 : to have written his History there about 556 or 
560 ; to have crossed to Ireland between 566 and 569 ; and to have died there in 570. For 
the nature and date of the compilation which bears the name of Nennius, see Guest, Early 
English Settlements, p. 36, and Stevenson's introduction to his edition of him. In its earliest 
form, it is probably of the seventh century. Little, however, is to be gleaned from the con- 
fused rhetoric of Gildas ; and it is only here and there that we can use the earlier facts which 
seem to be embedded among the later legends of Nennius. — J. R. Green, The Making of 
England, p. 23. 

St. Gildas, the author of a querulous treatise, De excidio Britannia, is said, in his Life, 
by an anonymous monk of Ruys, in Brittany, about 1040, to have been born at Alcluyd, or, 
as he calls it, in the most fertile region of Arecluta (a.d. 520) ; his father, according to his 
other biographer, Caradoc of Llancarvan, a writer of the following century, called Nau, (or 
Kau,) and being the King of Scotland, the most noble of the northern kings ; meaning, it is 
presumed, that he was a king or prince of Strathclyde. The monk of Ruys, however, only 
calls the father " nobilissimus et catholicus vir," though he says that " Cuillus " (Hueil, 
Caradoc) " post mortem patris, ei in regno successit." — Ritson, Annals of Strathclyde, 
p. 142. 

2 See p. 201, sec. 19. 

On their departure from Britain in 407 the Roman Government probably calculated on 
re-establishing their authority at no distant day, and left certain officials of native birth to 
administer the government, which for a time they had been forced to relinquish. For some 
time previous to this Britain had been divided into five provinces, of which Valentia, the 
northernmost, so named by Theodosius in honour of the Emperor Valentinian, was left under 
the rule of Cunedda or Kenneth, the son of Edarn or Aeternus. Tradition says that his 
mother was a daughter of Coel Hen, British King of Strathclyde, whose name is preserved in 
that of the district of Kyle in Ayrshire, and in our nursery rhyme of " Old King Cole." 
(Coel Hen signifies Old Cole.) Cunedda's official title as ruler of Valentia was Dux Britan- 
niarum, or Duke of the Britons. He left eight sons, some of whom became, like their father, 
very powerful and distinguished. From one of these, Meireon, the county of Merioneth is 
named ; from another, Keredig, the county of Cardigan. — Maxwell, History of Dumfries 
and Galloway, pp. 31, 32. 

The five Romanized tribes of North Britain continued to occupy their respective districts, 
and were known in history as the Cumbrians, or Walenses. They remained divided, as for- 
merly, in clanships, each independent of the other, and an almost constant civil war was the 
consequence. They were exposed to repeated inroads from the Scots and Picts ; and to the 
invasion of a still more dangerous enemy — the Saxons — who, in the fifth century, extended 
their conquests along the east coast of North Britain, from the Tweed to the Forth ; the de- 
feated Otadini and Gadeni falling back among their countrymen, the Damnonii, and other 
tribes who occupied the Lothians. Seeing the peril by which they were surrounded — the Picts 
and Scots on the north, and the Saxons on the south — the inhabitants of Ayrshire, Renfrew- 
shire, Lanarkshire, Dumfriesshire, Liddesdale, Teviotdale, Galloway, and the greater part of 
Dumbartonshire and Stirlingshire, formed themselves into a distinct kingdom called Alcluyd. 
The metropolis of the kingdom — Alcluyd — was, no doubt, situated on the banks of the Clyde, 

The Britons 229 

but the precise locality is not now known. Dumbarton rock was the main place of strength, 
and the seat of the reguli. The history of the Alcluyd kingdom presents a series of wars 
domestic and foreign, throughout the greater portion of its existence — sometimes with the 
Picts, sometimes with the Scots, oftener with the Saxons, and not less frequently one clan 
against another. Though repeatedly defeated and overrun, they continued to defend them- 
selves with great spirit ; and more than once their restless enemies felt the weight of their 
sword. — Paterson, History of the County of Ayr, vol. i., p. 13. 

8 Mr. Nash, in his introduction to Merlin, or the Early History of King Arthur , makes a 
statement which appears to me to be well founded : 4< Certain it is," he says, " that there are 
two Celtic — we may perhaps say two Cymric — localities, in which the legends of Arthur and 
Merlin have been deeply implanted, and to this day remain living traditions cherished by the 
peasantry of these two countries, and that neither of them is Wales or Britain west of the 
Severn. It is in Brittany and in the old Cumbrian kingdom south of the Firth of Forth that 
the legends of Arthur and Merlin have taken root and nourished." To Cumbria, however, 
may be added Cornwall, where the Arthurian romance places the scene of many of its 
adventures ; and it is rather remarkable that we should find in the second century a tribe 
termed Damnonii possessing Cornwall and a tribe of the same name occupying the ground 
which forms the scene of his exploits in the north. — Skene, Celtic Scotland, vol. i., pp. i54~55« 

4 " If any reality could be extracted from them, Scotland would have full share in it, 
since much of the narrative comes northward of the present border. Berwick was the Joye- 
use garde of Sir Lancelot, and Aneurin describes a bloody battle round Edinburgh Castle. 
Local tradition and the names of places have given what support such agencies can to the 
Scottish claims on the Arthurian history. So the curious Roman edifice on the bank of the 
Carron was called Arthur's Oon or Oven ; and we have Arthur's Seat, Ben Arthur, Arthurlee, 
and the like. The illustrious * Round Table ' itself is at Stirling Castle. The sculptured 
stones in the churchyard of Meigle have come down as a monument to the memory and 
crimes of his faithless wife. A few miles westward, on Barry Hill, a spur of the Gram- 
pians, the remnants of a hill-fort have an interest to the peasant as the prison of her captivity. 
In the pretty pastoral village of Stowe there was a ' Girth ' or sanctuary for criminals, attrib- 
uted to the influence of an image of the Virgin brought by King Arthur from Jerusalem, and 
there enshrined. . . . 

" The parish of Meigle, in Forfarshire, is the spot most richly endowed with these monu- 
ments ; and Boece tells us that they commemorate Arthur's false queen, here known by the 
name of Guanora, who fell a captive to the Picts in their contest with the Britons." — Burton, 
History of Scotland, vol. i., pp. 143, 177. 

See Arthurian Localities, their Historical Origin, Chief Country, and Fingalian Re- 
lations, by John Stuart Glennie, M.A., 1869. 

5 Cornwall was subsequently occupied by the [Saxon] strangers, and the place of the 
Britons to the south of present Scotland became limited to what was afterwards known as the 
principality of Wales. The narrow part of North England, Lancashire and Yorkshire, 
being occupied by the Saxons there was thus a gap between the Southern Britons and those 
of Scotland. These latter became a little independent state, known as Strathclyde, en- 
dowed with a sort of capital and national fortress at Dumbarton. This country is now 
known as the shires of Ayr, Renfrew, Lanark, Stirling, and Dumbarton. It had its own 
small portion in the events of the time through which it existed in independence, and became 
at last, as we shall see, absorbed in the aggregation that made the kingdom of Scotland. Such 
was one of the early elements of this aggregation. — Burton, History of Scotland, vol. i., 
p. 82. 

6 The same natural boundary which separated the eastern from the western tribes after- 
wards divided the kingdom of the Strathclyde Britons from that of the Angles ; at a subse- 
quent period, the province of Galweia from that of Lodoneia in their most extended sense ; 
and now separates the counties of Lanark, Ayr, and Dumfries from the Lothians and the 

230 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

Merse. Galloway in its limited sense was not more clearly separated by this mountain bar- 
rier on the north from Strathclyde than were the Pictish races from the British race by the 
same chain, and the earlier tribes of the Selgovae and Novantae from the Damnonii. 

7 See pp. 242-43. 

8 See pp. 269-70. 

9 Ida, the son of Eoppa, possessed countries on the left-hand side of Britain, i. e., of the 
Humbrian sea, and reigned twelve years, and united Dynguayth Guarth-Berneich [Deira and 
Bernicia]. — JVennius, § 61. 

10 The name Welsh, or Wealas, meaning "strangers," or "foreigners," was applied by 
the English to all the Celtic inhabitants of Britain. 

11 See Proceedings Scottish Antiquarian Society, vol. vi., p. 91. 

12 " We arrive at something like historic certainty of events in the southwest. The An- 
gles were pagans. The Picts of Novantia had generally relapsed from Christianity into their 
original cult, of which the traditions had been kept alive by the native bards, and a large part 
of the Welsh population, in the valleys of Annan, Nith, and Clyde, had followed them. The 
Welsh leader was Gwendolew, who claimed descent from Coel Hen — Old King Cole. But 
there was still a Roman party among these northern Britons, led by Rydderch Hael — that is, 
Roderick the Liberal — who adhered to Christianity. 

" The great issue between the pagans and Christians was fought out on the borders of 
Dumfriesshire in 575, at a place called Ardderyd, now Arthuret, on the Scottish bank of the 
Esk. Gwendolew's camp was about four miles north of this, and gave the name still borne 
by a stream called Carwhinelow — that is, caer Gwendolew, Gwendolew's camp. (The parish 
of Carruthers in Dumfriesshire probably takes its name from caer Rydderch, Roderich's camp.) 
The Christian champion Rydderch was completely victorious, and became ruler of the Strath- 
clyde Britons, under the title of King of Alclut." — Maxwell, History of Dumfries and Gallo- 
way, p. 34. 

13 Reeves's edition, 1874, pp. 15, 136, 224. 

14 It is called likewise, by Adamnan, Petra-Cloithe, and by other ancient writers, Are- 
cluta, Alcwith, Aldclyhit, and Alcluth ; all implying a rock, or elevation, upon the Clyde, 
now Dumbarton, a corruption of Dunbritton. The foundation of the monarchy cannot be 
ascertained. If, however, we may credit the Life of St. Ninian [written in the twelfth cen- 
tury], it existed so early as the fourth ; whence it can be traced, with sufficient certainty, 
down to nearly the close, at least, of the tenth. — Ritson, Annals of the Caledonians, Picts, 
etc., vol. ii., p. 132. 

15 The population of this kingdom seems to have belonged to the two varieties of the 
British race — the southern half, including Dumfriesshire, being Cymric or Welsh, and the 
northern half having been occupied by the Damnonii, who belonged to the Cornish variety. 
The capital of the kingdom was the strongly fortified position on the rock on the right bank 
of the Clyde, termed by the Britons Alcluith, and by the Gadhelic people Dunbreatan, or the 
fort of the Britons, now Dumbarton ; but the ancient town called Caer Luel or Carlisle in the 
southern part must always have been an important position. The kingdom of the Britons 
had at this time no territorial designation, but its monarchs were termed kings of Alcluith, 
and belonged to that party among the Britons who bore the peculiar name of Romans, and 
claimed descent from the ancient Roman rulers in Britain. The law of succession seems to 
have been one of purely male descent. — Celtic Scotland, vol. i., p. 236. 

16 642, Domnall-brecc in cath Strathacauin in fine anni in Decembre interfectus est xv 
regni sui ab Ohan rege Britonum. — Tighernac. 

17 Bede, book iv., ch. xxvi. See p. 204. 

18 722, Beli Alius Elfin moritur. — An. Cam. Bili mac Elphine rex Alochluaithe moritur. 
— Tighernac. 

The author of Galloway, Ancient and Modern, in his reading of the early annalists has 
fallen into the rather careless error of confusing the fathers of the Strathclyde kings with the 

The Britons 231 

kings themselves. For instance, at page 91, he says : " The next king of Strathcluyd was 
Owen, who was ruling in 694 when his son Daniel (Domnall) died. He was succeeded by 
Elphin (Alpin), who appears as king in 772 when his son Bili died." The record of Tighernac 
for 694 is as follows : " Domnall mac Avin [OwenJ rex Alochluaithne moritur," and for 722 
(not 772) the same record reads. " Bili mac Elphin rex Alochluaithe moritur." 

19 756, Eadberht rex, xviii. anno regni sui et Unust rex Pictorum duxerunt exercitum ad 
urbem Alcluth. Ibique Brittones in deditionem receperunt prima die mensis Augusti. — 
Simeon of Durham. 

The successes of Eadbert reduced the fortunes of the Britons in this quarter to the lowest 
ebb. Kyle was rendered tributary to Northumbria, which already included Cunningham ; 
and shortly after the middle of the century, Alclyde or Dumbarton, the strongest bulwark of the 
Northern Britons, surrendered to the united forces of the Northumbrians and the Picts. The 
capture of Alclyde must have thrown the whole of the ancient British territories in the Lennox, 
which were subsequently included in the diocese of Glasgow, into the power of Angus, to- 
gether with a great portion of the " debateable land " between the Forth and Clyde, similarly 
included in the " Cumbrian" diocese; and the little principality of Strathclyde was now 
completely hemmed in and surrounded by hostile territories, though the gradual decline of 
the Northumbrian power towards the close of the eighth century enabled the petty state to 
struggle on for another hundred years in a precarious species of nominal independence. — 
Robertson, Scotland under her Early Kings, vol. i., p. 18. 

20 English Chronicle, An. 828. See p. 298. 

81 See also the English Chronicle, Anno 875, p. 298, where in describing the same event, 
the people of Strathclyde are called the Strathclyde Welsh. The name Straecled Wealas 
is rendered by ^Ethelwerd into the Latin Cumbri, which Mr. Skene notes as the first appear- 
ance of the term Cumbri, or Cumbrians, as applied to the people of Strathclyde. 

1 * Much confusion has arisen from the ambiguous use of the appellations of Cumbria and 
Cumberland. The former name was undoubtedly applied at one time to a wide extent of 
country stretching at least from Dumbartonshire to North Wales, from which district it was 
early separated when the greater part of modern Lancashire was added to the Northumbrian 
dominions. A little later the grants of Ecgfrith to St. Cuthbert must have severed the modern 
counties of Cumberland and Westmoreland from the northern Cumbria or Strathclyde, which 
was still further curtailed by the settlements of the Angles in the diocese of Candida Casa, a 
district of which the greater part, if not the whole, had by this time probably fallen into the 
hands of the ancestors of the Picts of Galloway. 

" Southern Cumbria or Cumberland does not appear to have been included amongst the 
conquered districts recovered by the Britons after the defeat and death of Ecgfrid at the battle 
of Nechtan's Mere. When Eardulf the bishop carried off the relics of St. Cuthbert and St. 
Oswald from the profane violence of a pagan as fierce as Penda, the most trusted companion 
of his hurried flight was Edred, the Saxon Abbot of Carlisle ; and there is little reason to 
doubt that at this time the descendants of the men who won the land in the days of Ecgfrid 
still peopled the broad acres granted to the monastery of St. Cuthbert. Forty years later it 
is told how Edred, the son of Rixinc, the foremost chieftain amongst the nobility of Deira, 
rode ' westward over the hills,' and slew the Lord Eardulf, a prince of the Bernician race of 
Ida, carried off his wife 'in spite of the Frith and the people's wishes,' and held forcible 
possession of territories reaching from Chester le Street to the Derwent, till he lost both lands 
and life in the battle of Corbridge Moor. All these names are genuine Saxon, and though 
the original British population may still have lingered amidst the lakes and mountains of their 
picturesque region, it may be safely doubted whether they paid either tribute or submission 
to the Scoto-British prince who yet retained some vestiges of authority over the fertile valley 
of the Clyde ; and whilst Scottish Cumbria, or Strathclyde, continued under the rule of a 
branch of the MacAlpin family from the opening of the tenth century till the reign of Mal- 
colm the Second, English Cumbria, or Cumberland, when it was not under the authority of 

232 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

the Northumbrian earls, in whose province it was included, may be said to have remained in 
a state of anarchy till the conquest." — Scotland under her Early Kings, vol. i., p. 70. 

" The last retreat of the Romanized Britons was called originally Strathclyde, but in later 
times more frequently Cumbria. . . . 

1 ' In the scanty notices of the chroniclers the district is generally called a kingdom, but 
this may have been more from the habit of using that term towards the neighboring nations, 
than because there was any fixed form of monarchical government in Strathclyde." — Burton, 
History of Scotland, vol. i., pp. 182, 278, 279. 

22 Again, in 875, the same restless enemy, sallying forth from Northumberland, laid waste 
Galloway, and a great part of Strathcluyd. Thus harassed by the insatiable Northmen, many 
of the inhabitants of Alcluyd resolved upon emigrating to Wales. Under Constantin, their 
chief, they accordingly took their departure ; but were encountered by the Saxons at Loch- 
maben, -where Constantin was slain. They, however, repulsed their assailants, and forced 
their way to Wales, where Anarawa, the king, being at the time hard pressed by the Saxons, 
assigned them a district which they were to acquire and maintain by the sword. In the ful- 
filment of this condition, they aided the Welsh in the battle of Cymrid, where the Saxons 
were defeated and driven from the district. The descendants of these Strathcluyd Britons 
are said to be distinguished from the other inhabitants of Wales at the present day. The 
Strathcluyd kingdom was, of course, greatly weakened by the departure of so many of the best 
warriors ; and it continued to be oppressed both by the Scots and Anglo-Saxon princes. The 
judicious selection of a branch of the Scottish line as their sovereign had the effect of secur- 
ing peace between the two nations for some time. Hostilities, however, at length broke out 
with great fury, in consequence of Culen — who ascended the Scottish throne in 965 — having 
dishonored his own relative, a granddaughter of the late King of Strathcluyd. Incensed at 
the insult, the inhabitants flew to arms, under King Ardach, and marching into Lothian, there 
encountered the Scots. The battle was a fierce one, and victory declared for the Alcluyden- 
sians. Both Culen and his brother Eocha were slain. This occurred in 971. The Scottish 
throne was ascended by Kenneth III. [II.] ; and the war between the Scots and Cumbrians 
continuing, the latter, under Dunwallin — the successor of Ardach — were at length overpowered 
on the bloody field of Vacornar ; where, the Welsh Chronicle states, the victors lost many a 
warrior. Dunwallin retired to Rome in 975. The Strathcluyd kingdom, now fairly broken 
up, was annexed to the Scottish erown, and the inhabitants became mixed with the Scots and 
Picts. This was a successful era for the Scots. Though the country had been overrun by 
^Ethelstan, the Saxons gained no permanent advantage. On the contrary, Eadmund, in 945, 
ceded Cumberland, in England, to Malcolm I., on condition of unity and aid. Lothian, 
which had previously been held by England, was also delivered up to Malcolm III., in 1018, 
after the battle of Carham with Uchtred of Northumberland. — Paterson, History of the County 
of Ayr, p. 15. 

" An occasional brief entry in the early chronicles reveals the anxiety of the rulers of the 
Picts and Scots to avail themselves of the gradual decline of the Northumbrian power for the 
purpose of extending their own influence over the neighboring province of Strathclyde. 
Some such motives may have instigated Kenneth to seek for his daughter the alliance of a 
British prince ; and a few years later, the death of Artgha, King of Strathclyde, which is 
attributed by the Irish annalists to the intrigues of Constantine the First, may have been con- 
nected with the same policy of aggrandizement, and have furthered the claims of Eocha, the 
son of Constantine's sister. The advancement of Eocha to the Scottish throne was shortly 
followed by important consequences to his native province, and after the flight and death of the 
Welsh prince Rydderch ap Mervyn had deprived the northern Britons of one of their firmest 
supporters, a considerable body of the men of Strathclyde, relinquishing the ancient country 
of their forefathers, set out, under a leader of the name Constantine, to seek another home 
amongst a kindred people in the south. Constantine fell at Lochmaben in attempting to 
force a passage through Galloway ; but his followers, undismayed at their loss, persevered in 

The Britons 233 

their enterprise, arriving in time to assist the Northern Welsh at the great battle of the Con- 
way, where they won the lands, as the reward of their valor, which are supposed to be occu- 
pied by their descendants at the present day. (An. 67/., 876, 877 ; An. Camb. and Brut y 
Tywys. 880 ; Caledonia, vol. i., book iii., ch. v., p. 355.) 

"Chalmers gives the name of Constantine to their first leader, whilst, according to 
Caradoc, Hobart was their chief when they reached Wales. To some old tradition of this 
migration, and to the encroachments of the Galwegians, the Inquisitio Davidis probably 
alludes : 4 Diverse seditiones circumquaque insurgentes non solum ecclesiam et ejus pos- 
sessions destruxerunt verum etiam totam regionem vastantes ejus habitatores exilio tradide- 
runt. ' {Reg- Glasg) In fact it would appear as if a Scottish party had dated its rise from the 
days of Kenneth MacAlpin, and secured a triumph by the expulsion of its antagonists, on 
the accession of Eocha to the Scottish throne, and by the election of Donald in the reign of 
the second Constantine. 

" With the retreating emigrants, the last semblance of independence departed from the 
Britons of the north ; and upon the death of their king Donald, who was probably a descend- 
ant of Kenneth's daughter, Constantine the Second experienced little difficulty in procuring 
the election of his own brother Donald to fill the vacant throne. Henceforth a branch of the 
MacAlpin family supplied a race of princes to Strathclyde ; and although for another 
hundred years the Britons of that district remained in a state of nominal independence, they 
ceased to exist as a separate people, appearing, on a few subsequent occasions, merely as 
auxiliaries in the armies of the Scottish kings." — Scotland under her Early Kings, vol. 

i., p. 54- 

The Angles only retained their power over the Picts of Galloway and the Cumbrians 
south of the Solway, together with the city of Carlisle, which Ecgfrith, shortly before his 
death, had given to St. Cuthbert, with some of the land around it. The Cumbrians north 
of the Solway became independent, and had kings of their own again, of whom one is recorded 
as dying in 649, and another in 722. But the Picts of Galloway continuing under the yoke of 
the Northumbrians, the king of the latter managed in 750 to annex to Galloway the district 
adjoining it on the north and west, which was then a part of the land of the Cumbrians, 
though it may have long before belonged to the Picts. In the same year, a war took place 
between the former and the Picts of Lothian, who suffered a defeat and lost their leader, 
Talorgan, brother to the King of Alban, in a battle at a place called Mocetauc in the Welsh 
Chronicle, and supposed to be in the parish of Strathblane in the county of Stirling ; but in 
756 we read of the Picts and the Northumbrians joining, and pressing the Cumbrians sorely. 
Afterwards little is known of them (except that Alclyde was more than once destroyed by the 
Norsemen) until we come down to the end of the ninth century, when we meet with a Welsh 
tradition that the Cumbrians who refused to submit to the English were received by the King 
of Gwynedd into the part of North Wales lying between the Dee and the Clwyd, from which 
they are made to have driven out some English settlers who had established themselves there. 
How much truth there may be in this story is not evident, but it is open to the suspicion of 
being based to some extent on the false etymology which identifies the name of the Clwyd 
with that of the Clyde. It is needless to say that the latter, being Clota in Roman times, and 
Clut in old Welsh, could only yield Clud in later Welsh. Harassed and weakened on all 
sides, the Cumbrians ceased to have kings of their own race in the early part of the tenth 
century, when a Scottish line of princes established itself at Alclyde ; and in 946 the kingdom 
was conquered by the English king Eadmund, who bestowed the whole of it from the neigh- 
borhood of the Derwent to the Clyde [?] on the Scottish king Maelcoluim or Malcolm, on 
condition that he should assist him by land and sea, the help anticipated being intended 
against the Danes. . . . William the Red made the southern part of Cumbria, including 
the city of Carlisle, an earldom for one of his barons ; and thus it came to pass that the name 
of Cumberland has ever since had its home on the English side of the border, while the 
northern portion, of which the basin of the Clyde formed such an important part, is spoken of 

234 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

in the Saxon Chronicle as that of the Strathclyde Welshmen. It may here be added that this 
last was still more closely joined to the Scottish crown when David became king in 1124; 
but its people, who formed a distinct battalion of Cumbrians and Teviotdale men in the 
Scotch army at the battle of the Standard in 11 30, preserved their Cymric characteristics long 
afterwards. How late the Welsh language lingered between the Mersey and the Clyde we 
have, however, no means of discovering, but, to judge from a passage in the Welsh Triads, 
it may be surmised to have been spoken as late as the fourteenth century in the district of 
Carnoban (see Gee's Myvyrian Archaeology, p. 401, triad 7), wherever between Leeds and 
Dumbarton that may turn out to have been. — Rhys, Celtic Britain, pp. 146-148. 

23 On the west were the districts occupied by the Britons of Strathclyde. In the previ- 
ous century and a half these had been narrowed to the vale of the Clyde, with Alclyde or 
Dumbarton as its stronghold, and the rest of the British districts had, along with Galloway, 
been under the dominion of the Angles of Northumbria ; but their rule had been relaxed 
during the period of disorganization into which the Northumbrian kingdom had fallen, and 
had by degrees become little more than nominal, when the invasion of Bernicia by the Briton 
Giric, who for a time occupied the Pictish throne, led to the severance of these districts from 
Northumbria, and the whole of the British territory from the Clyde to the river Derwent in 
Cumberland became once more united under the rule of an independent king of the Britons. 
— Celtic Scotland, p. 346. 

24 Et in suo octavo anno cecidit excelsissimus rex Hibernensium et archiepiscopus apud 
Laignechos id est Cormac mac Cuilennan. Et mortui sunt in tempore hujus Donevaldus 
rex Britannorum et Duvenaldus Alius Ederex eligitur. — Chronicles of the Picts and Scots, p. 9. 

25 Fugato deinde Owino rege Cumbrorum et Constantino rege Scotorum, terrestri et 
navali exercitu Scotiam sibi subjugando perdomuit. — Simeon of Durham, Hist, de Dun. Ec, 

26 English Chronicle, Anno 945. 

944, Strathclyde was ravaged by Saxons. — Brut y Tywysogion. 

946, Stratclut vastata est a Saxonibus. — An. Camb. 

The life of St. Cadroe gives us almost a contemporary notice of the Cumbrian kingdom. 
St. Cadroe was a native of Alban, and flourished in the reign of Constantin who fought at 
Brunanburgh, and leaves him to go on a foreign mission. He comes to the " terra Cumbro- 
rum," and Dovenaldus, the king who ruled over this people, receives him gladly and conducts 
him "usque Loidam civitatem quae est confinium Normannorum atque Cumbrorum." 
— Chronicles of the Picts and Scots, p. 116. 

27 Statim predavit Britanniam ex parte Pedestres Cinadi occisi sunt maxima cede in Moin 
na Cornar. — Pictish Chronicle. 

28 He was, no doubt, the son of that Donald who was king of the Cumbrians when his 
kingdom was overrun by King Eadmund and bestowed upon Malcolm, King of Alban, and 
this shows that though the sovereignty was now vested in the Scottish kings, the line of pro- 
vincial kings still remained in possession of their territory. — Celtic Scotland, vol. i., p. 382. 

29 With him ended the kingdom of Strathclyde. Galloway as a portion of it then fell 
into the full possession of the Norsemen. — Mac Kerlie, Galloway, Ancient and Modern, p. 92. 


THE Norwegian and Danish invasions of Britain began in 793. In that 
year the Northmen made an attack upon the island of Lindisfarne, 
which lies a little south of Tweedmouth. Their raid is thus described by 
Simeon of Durham : 

In the same year [793] of a truth, the pagans from the northern region 
came with a naval armament to Britain like stinging hornets, and overran 
the country in all directions like fierce wolves, plundering, tearing, and 
killing not only sheep and oxen, but priests and levites, and choirs of monks 
and nuns. They came, as we before said, to the church of Lindisfarne, and 
laid all waste with dreadful havoc, trod with unhallowed feet the holy places, 
dug up the altars, and carried off all the treasures of the holy church. 
Some of the brethren they killed, some they carried off in chains, many they 
cast out naked and loaded with insults, some they drowned in the sea. 

The following year a party of Norsemen plundered the monastery at the 
mouth of the Wear, where their chief was killed, and their fleet afterwards 
wrecked by a storm. In the same year one of their fleets laid waste the 
Western Isles and sacked the church of Iona. Four years later they again 
visited the Western Isles. In 802 they burned the Iona church ; and in 806 
killed the inhabitants of that island, numbering sixty-eight persons. These 
pirates were distinguished by the Irish as belonging to two races, the Finn- 
gaill — white, or fair-haired strangers (Norse), — and the Dubhgaill, — black, or 
dark-haired strangers (Danes). 

While it has been generally customary to speak of them as Northmen, 
yet so far as Scotland was concerned they approached it from the east — and 
in the case of the Danes from the southeast — the distance between Norway 
and Scotland being but about two hundred miles. First sailing to the Ork- 
neys these invaders proceeded down along the west coast into the Irish Sea, 
and made their landings in Ireland, Cumberland, or Galloway ' as the hope 
of plunder might lead them. The Irish gave to the Danes the name of 
Ostmen, or Men of the East, which properly described them ; but that point 
of the compass from which they approached Normandy and the southern 
coast of England is the one that furnished them with the name by which 
they are best known. 

The following account of the operations of the Norse in Northern, West- 
ern, and Southwestern Scotland is based chiefly on the Orkneyinga and other 
Norse sagas, and on the Annals of Tighernac and of Ulster (see Appen- 
dixes O and P). 

In 825, Blathmhaic, son of Flann, was killed by the Norse in Iona. In 


236 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

839, the Danes came to Dublin with sixty-five ships. After plundering 
Leinster, they entered Scotland through Dalriada, and, in a battle with the 
Picts and Scots, killed their ruler, Eoganan, son of Angus. This helped 
to open the way for the accession of Kenneth MacAlpin to the Pictish 
throne. 3 

During Kenneth's reign his country was often harassed by these trouble- 
some visitors. Later they seem to have made permanent settlements in 
some parts of the island, particularly in the north and in Galloway. 3 In the 
1 latter district they intermarried with and made allies of the natives, who 
in time became known along the western coast of Scotland and in Ireland 
as the " Gallgaidhel ", or " stranger (*. ^., renegade) Gaels." 

The fragments of Irish Annals published by the Irish Archaeological 
Society state that in 852 a battle was given by Aedh, King of Ailech, to the 
fleet of the Gallgaidhel, who were said to be Scots and foster-children of the 
Northmen, and who themselves were formerly called Northmen. They were 
defeated and slain by Aedh, many heads being carried off as trophies by 
himself and Niall. The Irish justified their action on this occasion by say- 
ing that " these men were wont to act like Lochlans " (Northmen). Again 
it is stated of them in 858 that the Gallgaidhel were " a people who had re- 
nounced their baptism, and were usually called Northmen, for they had the 
customs of the Northmen, and had been fostered by them, and though the 
original Northmen were bad to the churches, these were by far worse in what- 
ever part of Erin they used to be." In 866 a large fleet of Danish pirates, 
under command of Halfdan and his two brothers, arrived off the coast of 
England. After spending the winter in East Anglia, they invaded Northum- 
bria, took the city of York, killed the two rival claimants to the North- 
umbrian throne, and made Ecgberht king. He ruled for six years, and was 
succeeded by Ricsig. 

In the same year in which occurred Halfdan's invasion of Northumbria, 
Olaf the White, the Norwegian king of Dublin, who had married a daughter 
of Kenneth MacAlpin and may have had designs upon the latter's throne, 
invaded Pictavia with the " Galls " of Erin and Alban, laid waste all the 
country, and occupied it from the kalends of January to the feast of St. 
Patrick (March 17th). On returning to Ireland, he took with him both 
booty and hostages. 4 From the same source we learn that in the year 870 
Alclyde was invested by the Northmen under Olaf and Imhair, and destroyed 
after a four months' siege ; much booty and a great host of prisoners being 
taken. Olaf and Imhair seem also to have attacked both the Picts of 
Galloway and the Angles of Bernicia, for they are said to have returned to 
Dublin with two hundred ships and great booty of men, Angles, Britons, 
and Picts, as captives. 6 In 875 a Danish army under command of Halfdan 
again ravaged Northumbria, Galloway, and Strathclyde, 6 and made great 
slaughter of the Picts. In the same year, Thorstein the Red (son of Olaf 
the White by Audur, daughter of the Norseman, Kettil Flatnose), who had 

The Norse and Galloway 237 

succeeded to his father's rule, attacked the northern provinces of Scotland 
and added Caithness, Sutherland, Ross, and Moray to his dominion. He 
was slain soon after by the Albanians. In the year 877 the Danes and 
Norwegians of Ireland contested for the mastery. The Finngaill being 
successful, the Danes were driven out of Ireland and entered Scotland. 
Here they attacked the Scots in Fifeshire and slew a great multitude of 
them, together with Constantine, their king. Between 885 and 890 the Nor- 
wegians colonized the Orkney Islands, and Harold Harfagr, King of Norway, 
having taken possession, gave them to Rognwald, Earl of Maeri. He re- 
linquished to his brother, Sigurd, on whom the King bestowed the title of 
jarl. Sigurd soon after invaded Scotland and reconquered Caithness, Suth- 
erland, Ross, and Moray. He was killed in an encounter with Maelbrigda, 
a Scottish jarl. His son, Guthorn, succeeded to his estates, but died within 
a year. Earl Rognwald then sent his own sons, Hallad and Einar, to 
rule the Orkneys, the latter of whom retained the government until his death 
in 936. 

About 900 a Danish army, having invaded and plundered Ireland, came 
into Scotland and overran the southern districts, righting several battles 
with the Scots, in one of which King Donald was slain. At this time the 
Norse influence was very strong in Caithness and Sutherland, those provinces 
being ruled from the Orkneys. The Norse also established themselves in 
the Western Isles and in Man, and soon came to exert almost as great an 
influence there as in Galloway. In 912 Rognwald, with a powerful band of 
Danish pirates, invaded Scotland and ravaged Dunblane. He returned 
again in 918, having visited and plundered in Ireland in the meantime. 
The Scots' king, Constantine, having united his forces with those of Ealdred, 
ruler of Bernicia, met the Danes in battle, and succeeded in routing them. 
Notwithstanding this, they soon afterwards secured possession of Bernicia, 
where Rognwald established himself as king. 7 In 937 the Scots, having 
united with the Danes of Northumbria and those of Dublin in making war 
against ^Ethelstan, shared in the disastrous defeat inflicted by that king 
upon his enemies at the battle of Brunanburgh. Soon after this event, Eric 
of the Bloody Axe, son of Harold Harfagr, King of Norway, came to the 
coasts of England on a plundering expedition. Having been offered a 
settlement in Northumberland by King ^Ethelstan, he seated himself there 
with his followers. After his death, his sons removed to the Orkneys, and 
in the reign of the Scottish king Indulf (954-962), they are said to have 
been the leaders of a Norwegian fleet which made a descent upon Buchan. 

Upon the death of Einar, Earl of the Orkneys, in 936, he was succeeded 
by his son Thorfinn, called the "Skull-cleaver," who married Grelauga, 
daughter of Dungadr, or Duncan, the Jarl of Caithness, and thus confirmed 
the possession of that province to his descendants. His eldest son, Havard, 
having succeeded to the rule, was slain by his own wife ; and Liotr, the 
second son, assumed the title and domain. Another brother, Skuli, disputed 

238 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

the succession. Having secured the support of the Scottish king, he gave 
battle to Liotr and was slain. Liotr fought a second battle with the Scots, 
and killed Earl Maelbrigdi, their leader ; but received a wound himself from 
which he afterwards died. Hlodver, the surviving son of Thorfinn Einarson, 
then became Earl of Orkney. Upon his death, which occurred about the 
year 980, Sigurd, his son, became ruler. Soon after, Finley (or Finleikre or 
Finlaec — son of Ruaidhri and brother to Maelbrigdi) who was the Scottish 
Mormaor (Earl) of Moray, made war against Sigurd, but was defeated by 
him in battle. The latter, in consequence, gained possession of Moray, 
Ross, Sutherland, and "Dali," all of which provinces he ruled over in 989. 
However, Finley mac Ruaidhri eventually recovered Moray at a later date, 
and continued as lord of that distiict until 1020, when he was slain by the 
sons of his brother, Maelbrigdi. 

These sons of Maelbrigdi appear to have been Malcolm, who died in 
1029, and Gilcomgain, who was killed in 1032. The latter had married 
Gruoch, daughter of Boete (son of King Kenneth MacMalcolm), or accord- 
ing to some authorities, a granddaughter of Boete other than Gruoch. 
After the death of Gilcomgain, his widow married Macbeth (son of Finley), 
who doubtless had a hand in the killing of her first husband, in retaliation 
for the killing of Finley by Gilcomgain and his brother. Malcolm mac 
Maelbrigdi (so-called by Tighernac), who died in 1029, is spoken of by the 
annalist as "«' (or king) of Scotland." Undoubtedly at that time the 
mormaors of Moray were the virtual rulers of the greater part of Scotland 
lying north of the Grampians. Under the Pictish system of descent, the 
rights of a deceased king's brother were superior to those of the king's son ; 
and as that system prevailed in the Highlands long after the tenth century, 
Finley would be the natural successor to the mormaorship on the death of 
his brother Maelbrigdi. This succession, however, as indicated above, was 
disputed by the sons of Maelbrigdi, and they succeeded in settling the title 
for the time being by killing their uncle. After their own deaths, Macbeth 
was the next in succession, notwithstanding Gilcomgain had left an infant 
son (Lulach). 

A few years after the beginning of the eleventh century (about 1008), 
the Orkneyinga Saga tells us, Sigurd, Earl of Orkney, married the daughter 
of Melkolf (Malcolm) " King of the Scots," and by her had a son, Thorfinn. 
When the latter was five years old, " the King of Scots gave to Thorfinn, his 
relation, Katanes [Caithness] and Sutherland, and an earl's title along with 
it, and gave him men to rule the domain along with him." 8 While this King 
Malcolm, has been identified with Malcolm MacKenneth (grandfather of Dun- 
can), King of Southern Scotland, by Messrs. Skene and Robertson and by 
all later writers founding on them, there is no certainty that they were the 
same. In some points the probabilities favor the view taken originally by 
Mr. Skene in his Highlanders, that the Norse sagas, in their first mention of 
King Malcolm, really referred to Malcolm mac Maelbrigdi, Mormaor of 

The Norse and Galloway 239 

Moray, the " ri " who died in 1029, and who was the ruler of the Scotland 
best known to Earls Sigurd and Thorfinn. (See " The Norse Sagas," Ap- 
pendix P.) 

Five years after Thorfinn's birth (in 1014), in the final struggle which 
took place between the Irish and the Danes, Earl Sigurd went to Dublin as 
an ally of the latter, and there met his death at the battle of Clontarf. 
Before embarking for Ireland, Sigurd had sent his young son Thorfinn 
to the child's grandfather, Malcolm, King of Scotland. Upon the death 
of the father, Malcolm bestowed Caithness and Sutherland upon Thorfinn, 
with the title of earl, and gave him men to enable him to establish 
his authority. Sigurd had three sons by a former wife — Sumarlidi, Brusi, 
and Einar — among whom the Orkneys were divided. They all died 
prior to 1029, however; and before King Malcolm's death in 1034, 
Thorfinn, their half-brother, had succeeded to the earldom of Orkney. 
On Duncan's accession to the Scottish throne, after the death of Malcolm, 
that king assumed full authority over Caithness, and bestowed it upon his 
nephew, Moddan, with the title of earl. Duncan's cousin, Thorfinn, naturally 
looked upon this as an abrogation of his own rights, and the two became 
enemies. When Moddan came north with his men from Sutherland to take 
possession of the earldom, he was met by a superior force under Thorfinn 
and compelled to retire. Duncan at once organized a considerable army, 
and having sent Moddan to the north overland, sailed from Berwick to 
Caithness with a fleet of eleven vessels. Thorfinn met the fleet in the 
Pentland Firth, and though having with him only five warships, defeated 
Duncan, and obliged the latter to retire to the Moray Firth, where he 
landed, and started for the south to get together a new army. Earl Mod- 
dan, who in the meantime had entered Caithness, was followed by Thorfinn's 
lieutenant, and surprised and slain at Thurso. Duncan collected as large 
an army as possible, and having entered Moray again, met Thorfinn in battle 
at Torfness, or Broghead, where, the second time, he was completely defeated 
and his forces routed. Earl Thorfinn then overran and subdued the country 
as far south as Fife. 9 Soon after, Duncan was slain by Macbeth, the Mor- 
maor of Moray, whose father, Finley, had regained the mormaorship after the 
death of Earl Sigurd. Macbeth at the time may have been operating as an 
ally of Thorfinn 10 ; or, according to some accounts, endeavoring to make 
good his own wife's claim to the Scottish throne — a claim which seems to 
have been at least of equal merit with that of Duncan himself. 

After Duncan's death, Macbeth succeeded to his crown ; yet the power 
of Earl Thorfinn at this time was nearly as great as his own. Thorfinn pos- 
sessed the nine earldoms of Sutherland, Ross, Moray, " Dali," Buchan, Mar, 
Mearns, Angus, and Galloway " ; and without his assistance the Mormaor 
of Moray could hardly have succeeded in establishing himself upon the 
Scottish throne. 18 It is probable, therefore, that Macbeth's reign marked 
the highest point ever reached by Norse influence in Scotland. 1 * As that 

240 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

influence has a considerable interest in connection with the genesis and de- 
velopment of the people of Galloway, and one that has not until recently 
been clearly recognized, it may at this period properly be considered. 

The part of Scotland now known by the name of Galloway embraces the 
counties of Kirkcudbright and Wigton, which lie west of the lower Nith 
valley, and south of the range of high hills or mountains that form the 
southern boundary of Ayr and Dumfries. In earlier times, after its separa- 
tion from Strathclyde, Galloway probably included Annandale (in Dumfries), 
the two southern districts of Ayr (Kyle and Carrick), and perhaps also a great 
part of the northern district of Ayr (Cuninghame) in addition. 14 It thus 
embraced within its bounds nearly the whole of the southern and western 
coast of Scotland from the mouth of the Nith to the Clyde. 

St. Columba preached to the Northern Picts as early as 565 ; but long 
before that St. Ninian had converted the Galloway Picts, 16 and built the mis- 
sion station or monastery of Candida Casa, or White House, at Whithorn on 
the southeastern coast of Wigtonshire. 

Ninian is said to have been born on the shore of Solway Firth, 16 to have 
been the son of a king, or nobleman, and to have studied at Rome, where 
he was consecrated as Bishop by Pope Siricius. He started in 395 on a mis- 
sion to convert the Attecotts. 17 

Now, he chose his seat in a place which is now called Withern [Whithorn] ; 
which place, situate upon the shore of the ocean, while the sea stretches far 
from the east, west, and south, is inclosed by the sea itself ; from the north 
part a way is opened for those only who are willing to enter. There, then, 
by the command of the man of God, the masons, whom he had brought with 
him, erect a church ; before which they say there was none in Britain built 
of stone. 18 

This stone church presented such a contrast to the customary oaken struc- 
tures of the surrounding country that it soon became known far andwide as the 
White House. Ninian is said to have died and been buried here about 432." 

In Bede's time, Whithorn had been erected into an Episcopal See under the 
fostering care of the Northumbrian kings. The Lord of Northumbria like- 
wise maintained dominion over more or less of the territory and people of 
Galloway. 20 Such districts as did not acknowledge his sovereignty remained 
either under their own independent chiefs or were included in the kingdom 
of Strathclyde, which, after the victory of the Picts at Nechtansmere in 685, 
had been freed from the Northumbrian yoke. 

In 740, Alpin (son of Eachaidh by a Pictish mother), who had been suc- 
cessively king of the Northern Picts (726) and king of the Scots (729) and 
who later was driven out of those kingdoms by Angus, entered Galloway 
(Ayrshire) with an army and laid its territory waste. In 741 he was defeated 
by Innrechtach near the Dee, 31 and obliged to retreat to Loch Ryan, where 
he was assassinated." 

In 750 Eadberht, King of Northumbria, added the plain of Kyle and other 

The Norse and Galloway 241 

regions to his Galloway domain." These " other regions " are generally- 
supposed to have been portions of the adjacent districts of Cuninghame and 
Carrick in Ayrshire." They were retained as dependencies until the close of 
the same century, when by reason of civil feuds at home, and the increasing 
invasions of the Norsemen from without, the Angles were compelled to 
withdraw from Galloway and their suzerainty was given up. 36 

It has usually been assumed by modern historians, founding on George 
Chalmers, that there were repeated invasions of Galloway from Ireland dur- 
ing the seventh and eighth centuries, and that this district was then, like 
Argyle in the sixth, largely colonized by emigrants from Ulster. This 
assumption has been in a great measure refuted by Mr. Skene," and as the 
question is one of considerable interest at this point, it will not be amiss to 
give his argument some consideration. It is as follows : 

Chalmers, in his Caledonia (i., p. 358), states dogmatically that Galloway 
was colonized in the eighth century by Cruithne [Picts] from Ireland, and that 
they were followed by fresh " swarms from the Irish hive during the ninth and 
tenth centuries," and this statement has been accepted and repeated by all 
subsequent writers as if there were no doubt about it. There is not a vestige 
of authority for it. Galloway belonged during these centuries to the North- 
umbrian kingdom, and was a part of Bernicia. Bede, in narrating the foun- 
dation of Candida Casa by St. Ninian (Book iii., ch. iv.), says, " qui locus ad 
provinciam Berniciorum pertinens " ; and there is abundant evidence that 
Galloway was under the rule of the Northumbrian kings after his time. It 
is antecedently quite improbable that it could have been colonized from Ire- 
land during this time without a hint of such an event being recorded either 
in the Irish or English annals. 

The only authorities referred to by Chalmers consist of an entire misap- 
plication of two passages from the Ulster Annals. He says : " In 682 a.d., 
Cathasao, the son of Maoledun, the Mormaor of the Ulster Cruithne, sailed 
with his followers from Ireland, and landing on the Firth of Clyde, among 
the Britons, he was encountered and slain by them near Mauchlin, in Ayr, 
at a place to which the Irish gave the name of Rathmore, or great fort. In 
this stronghold Cathasao and his Cruithne had probably attacked the Britons, 
who certainly repulsed them with decisive success." — Ulster An., sub. an. 
682. " In 702 the Ulster Cruithne made another attempt to obtain settlement 
among the Britons on the Firth of Clyde, but they were again repulsed in 
the battle of Culin." — lb., sub. an. 702. The original texts of these pass- 
ages is as follows : " 682. Beltum Rathamoire Maigiline contra Britones ubi 
ceciderunt Catusach mac Maelduin Ri Cruithne et Ultan fllius Dicolla. 702. 
Bellum Campi Cuilinn in Airdo nepotum Necdaig inter Ultu et Britones ubi 
filius Radgaind cecidit. Ecclesiarum Dei Ulait victores erant." Now, both 
of these battles were fought in Ulster. Rathmore, or great fort of Maigiline, 
which Chalmers supposed to be Mauchlin, in Ayr, was the chief seat of the 
Cruithne in Dalaraidhe, or Dalaradia, and is now called Moylinny. See 
Reeves's Antiquities of Down and Connor, p 70. Airdo nepotum Necdaig, or 
Arduibh Eachach, was the Barony of Iveagh, also in Dalaradia, in Ulster 
(lb., p. 348) ; and these events were attacks by the Britons upon the Cruith- 
nigh of Ulster, where the battles were fought, and not attacks by the latter 
upon the British inhabitants of Ayrshire 

242 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

Now, while it must be admitted that the case against the relevancy of 
Mr. Chalmers's citations and his theory of an eighth century settlement of the 
Irish in Galloway is a very clear one, the fact remains that for several hun- 
dred years past, and certainly as far back as the time of Kenneth MacAlpin 
(840), there have been apparent in the people themselves direct indications 
of large Gaelic infusions into the Galloway population, whether their origin 
be Ireland or the north of Scotland. The most noticeable of these evidences 
are to be found in the language and in the names of the people. Up to and 
beyond the twelfth century the Picts of Galloway spoke the Gaelic tongue. 
At the battle of the Standard in 1138 the war-cry of the Galwegians, who 
were in the van of the Scottish army, was " Albanaich ! Albanaich ! " the 
Gaelic name for Scotland ; and the English on the other side are said to have 
answered back in derision, " Yry ! Yry ! " (Irish ! Irish !) To this day, 
" Eerish " is a term of contempt in Galloway." 

Mr. Skene, while fully acknowledging the presence of a considerable 
Gaelic element in the Galloway population, and while ever alive to the im- 
portant bearing which language sustains to racial questions, handles it in 
this case more with reference to its efficacy as a refutation of the claim for 
a Cymro-Celtic origin of the Galloway Picts. 28 But in doing so he incident- 
ally presents some testimony which, if it proves no one thing in particular, 
at least shows what was the vulgar opinion of the origin of the Galwegians, 
about the time of John Knox. This testimony is as follows : 

If any part of the Pictish people might be expected to retain their pecu- 
liar language and characteristics, it would be the Picts of Galloway ; and if 
that language had been a Cymric dialect, it must have merged in the speech 
of the British population around them. In one of the legends which seems 
peculiarly connected with them, Gaedel Ficht or the Gaelic Pict appears as 
the " eponymus " of the race ; and Buchanan tells us that in his day, that is, 
in the reign of Queen Mary, " a great part of this country still uses its ancient 
language." What that language was we learn from a contemporary of 
Buchanan, William Dunbar, the poet, who, in the " Flyting " between him and 
Kennedy, taunted his rival with his extraction from the natives of Galloway 
and Carrick, and styles him " Ersch Katheraine," " Ersch brybour baird,"and 
his poetry as " sic eloquence as they in Erschert use." This word " Ersch " 
was the term applied at the time to Scotch Gaelic, as when Sir David 
Lyndesay says — 

Had Sanct Gerome bene borne intil Arygle, 
Into Irische toung his bukis had done compyle. 

And Kennedy retorts upon Dunbar — 

Thow luvis nane Erische, enf I understand, 

But it sowld be all trew Scottismenn is leid ; 
It was the gud langage of this land. 

Mr. Mac Kerlie, in Paterson's History of the County of Ayr (pp. 14, 16), 
explains the reasons for the similarity between the Gaelic tongue of Galloway 
and that of Ulster, in this wise : 

The Norse and Galloway 243 

In 740, however, the Alcluydensians of Kyle were invaded by Alpin, 
king of the Scots, who landed at Ayr with a large body of followers. He is 
said to have wasted the country between the Ayr and the Doon as far inland as 
the vicinity of Dalmellington, about sixteen miles from the sea. There he 
was met by an armed force under the chiefs of the district, and a battle hav- 
ing ensued, Alpin was slain, and his army totally routed. The spot where 
the king was buried is called at this day Laicht- Alpin, or the Grave of Alpin. 
Chalmers observes that this fact is important, as showing that the Gaelic 
language was then the prevailing tongue in Ayrshire. No doubt it is : but 
it is one of the strongest arguments that could be urged against his theory 
that the Gaelic was superinduced upon the British, which he holds was the 
language of the Caledonian Picts, as well as the Romanised tribes. If the 
Damnonii of Ayrshire spoke Gaelic in 836, they must have done so long be- 
fore ; because at that period, as we have seen, the Scots of Argyle had made 
no settlement in Ayrshire. 

But the fact that there is a considerable difference between the Gaelic of 
the Galloway Cruithne and the Gaelic of the Scots — that the former bears a 
much closer affinity to the Irish as it now exists — is strong evidence that 
the Scottish Gaelic was not a direct importation from Ireland, and that the 
Dalriads of Argyle were not purely Irish. Though originally from North 
Britain, the Cruithne had been long resident in Ireland, and did not settle 
in Galloway till about four centuries later than the return of Fergus to 
Argyleshire ; consequently the greater similarity in language and customs 
can easily be accounted for." 

The evidences of a considerable Gaelic admixture in the blood of the 
early southwestern Scotchmen are also shown in their place-names and sur- 
names. This is particularly the case in Ayrshire, which was the native 
county of the first emigrants to Antrim and Down in the seventeenth century. 
To again quote the author of the History of the County of Ayr (vol. i., pp. 
9, 16, 17) : 

In so far as Ayrshire is concerned, there can be no doubt that the early 
inhabitants were purely Celtic ; whether called Britons, Belgse, Scots, Picts, 
or Cruithne, they must all have been of Gallic extraction. This is apparent in 
the topography of the country, the hill-forts, stone-monuments, and Druidi- 
cal and other remains which have everywhere been found. Even yet, not- 
withstanding the frequent accessions, in later times, of Saxons, Normans, 
and Flemings, the bulk of the population retains much of its original features. 
This appears in the prevailing patronymics, many of which preserve their 
Celtic prefixes, such as M'Culloch, M'Creath, M'Crindle, M'Adam, M'Phad- 
ric, or M'Phedries ; or have dropped them like the Alexanders, Andrewses, 
Kennedies, and Bones, within these few centuries. Campbell is a numerous 
surname. The Celtic lineaments are perhaps not so strong in Cuninghame, 
at least in the middle portion of it, as in the other districts ; but this is easily 
accounted for by the early settlements of the De Morville, and other great 
families from England, in the richest parts of it. In Pont's maps, drawn up 
at the commencement of the seventeenth century, the Celtic names are more 
numerous both in Kyle and Cuninghame than in the maps of the present day. 
The Gaelic language is said [by Buchanan] to have been spoken in some 
quarters of Ayrshire so late as the sixteenth century. . . . 

244 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

The main topographical argument of Chalmers in favor of the Scoto- 
Irish theory, is the circumstance of Inver, in two instances, having been sub- 
stituted for Aber. Now, as formerly shown, there are only two solitary 
instances of Inver in the whole topography of Ireland, and not one through- 
out the range of Galloway. The word, therefore, seems to have been pecu- 
liar to the Scottish Gael. In Kyle, on the contrary, we have several samples 
of it in old charters. Ayr itself is called Inver-ar in some instances, while 
we have Inverpolcurtecan and Inverdon. Another distinction between the 
Gaelic, Welsh, and Irish, worthy of being taken notice of, is the patronymic 
mark. In the Scots it is Mac ; in Welsh, Ap ; and in Irish, 0\ Now, if 
the Scots had been thoroughly Irish in their descent, as Chalmers affirms 
they were in their manners, laws, and customs, it is difficult to understand 
why they should have differed so widely upon so common a point ; and it is 
equally strange that, in the oldest charters, where the Walenses, the re- 
mains of the Alcluyd Britons, are distinctly mentioned, there should not 
occur a single Welsh patronymic mark, if the language of the North Britons 
and the Welsh were so congenerous as he supposed. If we take, according 
to Chalmers, the British words in the topography of Scotland as a proof 
that the inhabitants spoke Welsh, the same rule would apply equally to Ire- 
land, where the same British words are prevalent. 

The lists of the Scottish and Pictish kings are adduced by Chalmers as 
another proof of the British speech of the Picts, the names of the latter 
having no meaning unless in the British. Now this is not the case. Most 
of the Pictish names are just as capable of being explained by a Gaelic 
dictionary as those of the Scots. The difference lies chiefly in the spelling, 
a circumstance which is not to be wondered at. 

The Gaelic was not a written language. The earliest verses known are 
the Duan, a sort of genealogy of the Scottish kings, composed in the 
eleventh century, during the reign of Malcolm Canmore. The Irish Annals 
of Ulster and Tighernach were not written before the thirteenth [?] century, 
so that any writings at all extant — even where Gaelic names of places occur 
in the earliest charters — all make a nearer approach to the language as it is 
now spoken and understood than the Welsh authorities, to whose records of 
facts we are chiefly indebted for any knowledge which has been preserved of 
the Picts or Alcluydensians, and who wrote at a much earlier period. The 
annals of the latter came to us through an ancient Cambro-British medium, 
those of the Scots through a recently written, and no doubt much changed 
branch of a kindred tongue. 

Another argument against the Irish extraction of the Scots may be drawn 
from the statement of Chalmers, that the Scoto-Irish brought the custom of 
war-cries with them. Now, in the first place, we know that war-cries were 
not peculiarly Irish ; and, in the second, that the Scots did not use the affix 
abo, to their cries, such as Butler-#&?, or Crom-abo, which was general over 
Ireland. Their national war-cry was simply Albanich from Albyn, the 
ancient name of North Britain. Thus we see there was nothing Irish 
even in the style of their war-cry, while the cry itself shows that they were 
of Albyn, not of Ireland. Even the Cruithne, or " the wild Scots of Gallo- 
way," as they were termed in the twelfth century, used the same war-cry. 
At the battle of the Standard, in 1136, they led the van, 30 and rushing on to 
battle, the cry was " Albanich ! Albanich ! Albanich ! " Thanks to Hove- 
den, who has recorded the circumstance, we have here strong presumptive 
proof that both the Dalriads of Argyle and the Cruithne of Galloway were 
originally from Albyn, and had preserved the same national war-cry through- 

The Norse and Galloway 245 

out their long pilgrimage in the North of Ireland. As the term Albyn only- 
applied in ancient times to the Pictish country north of the Forth, the cry 
would not have been locally appropriate in Galloway ; hence it was not 
likely to have been adopted after their arrival. The war-cry in ancient, like 
armorial bearings in more modern times, may be regarded as strong evidence 
of descent. 

Taking all things into consideration, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion 
that there was, in reality, very little difference originally between the 
language of the Scots, Picts, and Alcluydensians. If there had been as 
great a distinction between the Gaelic and the Pictish language as the 
apocryphal specimen left by Merlin, a poet of the sixth century, would lead 
us to suppose, there would have been little use in appointing Gaelic clergy- 
men over a Pictish people. That what is now the Lowland dialect had its 
rise during the Scottish period there can be little doubt. The annexation 
of Lothian, occupied for centuries chiefly by the Angles, brought them into 
closer contact with the inhabitants of the adjacent districts ; while a body 
of Saxons actually effected a settlement in Kyle and Cuninghame. Though 
these, it may be inferred, did not long retain possession, owing to the de- 
cline of the Northumbrian power, still the probability is that a portion both 
of their lineage and language remained. The many Saxons brought into 
Scotland by Malcolm Canmore — though numbers of them were expelled 
by the Scots after his death — must have tended greatly to disseminate a 
language already constituting the vernacular tongue of the east coast from 
the Forth to the Tweed. 

The Lowland dialect, originating in a combination of the oldest and 
purest Teutonic with the native Gaelic or British, owes to this union much 
of that peculiar softness, copiousness, and graphic power for which it is dis- 
tinguished. One-third of the language, upon careful examination, will be 
found to be Celtic. It has also a considerable admixture of French, the 
acquisition of which can easily be accounted for by the number of Norman 
settlers who came amongst us, and the subsequent intercourse which took 
place between France and Scotland. In the next, or Anglo-Saxon period 
of our history, the growth of the Scottish dialect can be still more distinctly 

In reference to the laws during the era of which we are now writing, 
Chalmers shows that they were Celtic, and very different from the Saxon ; 
but that they were peculiarly Scoto-Irish, as in accordance with his system, 
he affirms, is by no means so clear. It is not at all proved that the laws of the 
Scots were different from those of the Picts, or Lowland Britons. The pre- 
dominance of the Scots brings them down more nearly to written evidence ; 
and therefore we have a better knowledge of the customs which prevailed 
under their rule. On the contrary, we are almost in total ignorance of the 
laws by which the Picts or Alcluydensians were governed. 

The law of tanistry — by which the succession of the crown was regu- 
lated — existed apparently amongst the Picts as well as the Scots. Bede 
casually informs us that it was a rule with the Picts, when the succession 
came to be disputed, that the preference should be given to the nearest 
claimant by the female side. It was this law which placed Kenneth on the 
throne, in opposition to the other competitor, Bred. 

That the customs of the Scots and Picts were the same is apparent from 
an ordinance of Edward I., issued with a view to the settlement of Scotland, 
in which he says, " the custom of the Scots and Picts shall for the future be 
prohibited, and be no longer practised." Customs, not custom, would have 

246 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

been the phrase if there had been different customs prevailing among the 
Scots and Britons. During the Scottish period the country had been eccle- 
siastically divided into parishes, but the introduction of sheriffdoms and 
justiciaries belongs to a later age. 

Mr. MacKerlie refers to the same conditions in the district of modern 
Galloway {Galloway, Ancient and Modern, pp. 62-63) : 

The distance between the county Down and Galloway is twenty-two 
miles, and thus only eight miles farther off than Antrim from Kintyre, and 
both to be seen from Ireland. The emigration to Galloway must have been 
gradual, and spread over centuries, until the Ulster settlers were so numer- 
ous as to become the dominant people. It is to be remembered that the 
Strathclyde kingdom came into existence about a.d. 547-8, which fully 
accounts for the absence of information in regard to the erroneous supposi- 
tion that Galloway was an independent district, with rulers of its own. This 
continued until a.d. 1018, when Strathclyde as a kingdom came to an end ; 
but the Norsemen then got full possession of and sway over Galloway, which 
continued for about two centuries, until the kings of Scotland were fully 
established, and ruled over the whole kingdom, as since known. 

The popular idea that Galloway was all along a kingdom in itself is 
purely ideal, and without the slightest basis for it. We wish to direct atten- 
tion to the close communication which evidently existed between Galloway 
and Ireland from the earliest times. It is easily understood from being such 
close neighbours. There also cannot be a doubt that the statement which 
eminent writers have handed down is virtually correct, that the Goidels or 
Gaels were the first Celtic inhabitants, who absorbed the aborigines as the 
situations or circumstances demanded, and who in turn were next dislodged 
by the Cymri, and other Celtic fresh hordes who flocked into Britain, driving 
the said Goidels northwards, and across to Ireland. If other proof were 
wanting, we have it in the surnames, and in the names of places, many of 
which are common to both Galloway and Ireland, being found on both sides 
of the Channel. 

There was a more or less considerable Teutonic element introduced into 
the population of Galloway at an early date not only by the Angles who 
occupied it in Bede's time, but to a far greater extent by the Norse sea-kings 
and their followers, who settled there in large numbers during the latter part 
of the tenth and first half of the eleventh centuries. This conquest of 
Galloway and northern Scotland has been briefly sketched in the preceding 
pages. Let us now consider the results of that conquest. This subject has 
been treated at some length by the author last quoted, who says : 

The idea has also largely prevailed that Galloway was for long under 
Saxon rule, with no other basis, so far as we can trace, than that in a.d. 723 
commenced a succession of bishops connected with the Anglo-Saxon Church. 
This, however, was of short duration, as the last bishop was elected in 790. 
He was still there in 803, but the line ended with him. 31 This ecclesiastical 
establishment, which did not exist for a century, was distinct from district 
rule. The power of the Church of Iona extended to Northumberland, until 
the Anglo-Saxons conformed to Rome in 664. This latter was the church 

The Norse and Galloway 247 

thrust on the Galwegians, and failed at that period. Afterwards, when King 
David I., with his Anglo-Normans, etc., succeeded in establishing the 
Anglo-Church of Rome in Scotland without an archbishop, the Pope di- 
rected that the Primate of York should consecrate, and this was continued 
until an archbishop was established at St. Andrews in a.d. 1472. During 
that period, however, Scotland as a country was not subject to England, 
and so it was with Galloway, an ecclesiastical union only existing with 

That Galloway was overrun and devastated on different occasions is to be 
believed, but permanent settlement does not appear. The confusion, how- 
ever, about the district was kept up ; and under date 875 we are told that 
the Britons of Strathclyde and the Picts of Galloway were ravaged by the 
Danes of Northumberland. 82 This is correct in one sense, as the Irish-Scots 
in Galloway, through Bede, had their name stamped in history as Picts ; 
but we have mentioned in its proper place how it arose. The statement 
under date 875 conveys that Galloway and Strathclyde were not united, 
which is erroneous. 

Mackenzie, in his History of Galloway, while joining in the usual opinion 
(taken from uninvestigated writings), yet admits that few traces are left in 
support of Anglo-Saxon occupation, and at Whithorn specially, the place 
where such should be found. In the absence of facts, he therefore had re- 
course to making out something from the names of places, in which he was 
singularly unfortunate. His examples were Boreland, Engleston, and Carle- 
ton, as now spelled. The first he describes as the habitations of the slaves 
who were employed by the Anglo-Saxons to till the ground, termed boors, and 
hence Boreland. The next, Engleston, or Ingleston, is described as applied 
to farms which had been occupied by the Angles. The last is Carleton, 
which lands he states were so called from the ceorles, or middle-class Saxons,, 
who were the owners. 

We thus have Galloway and Ayrshire transformed into an Anglo-Saxon 
province, as having been fully in their possession. The meanings given of 
all three are entirely erroneous. Boreland, as Bordland, is to be found as 
" lands kept by owners in Saxon times for the supply of their own board or 
table, but it referred specially to the Norsemen, from the Orkneys to Gal- 
loway, as lands exempt from skatt, the land-tax, for the upholding of Gov- 
ernment. Ingleston has been corrupted by some writers to Englishtoun, the 
abode of the English, whereas it is also from the Norse and refers to land of 
a certain character or quality. Under our reference to the Norse occupa- 
tion of Galloway, we will enter into more particulars in regard to the names 
Boreland and Engleston. Lastly, Carleton, being from ceorles, is very far- 
fetched. If it had been from a Saxon source as indicated, the class from 
whom it is said to have been derived must have been very few (three or four) 
in number. . . . Other lands in Wigtonshire, and Borgue parish, 
Kirkcudbrightshire, got the same designation from descendants who removed 

In fact, all the erroneous exaggerations in regard to the Anglo-Saxon occu- 
pation of Galloway have arisen from the Norse rule being overlooked. The 
supposition has been that the latter only held the coast, whereas their rule 
of the district was thorough. 33 

The earliest record of the appearance of the Norsemen in British waters 
is to be found in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles. They are stated to have come 
from Haeretha-land, now Hordaland, on the west coast of Norway. The 
Irish Annals and Welsh Chronicles give the date of their first appearance on 

248 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

the Irish coast as a.d. 795, but it is clear enough that they were known cen- 
turies previously. . . . About 872, King Harold, aided by Earl Rogn- 
wald, subdued the Hebrides, inclusive of the Isle of Man. Thorstein the 
Red, son of Olaf the White, King of Dublin, and Earl Sigurd, subdued 
Caithness and Sutherland, as far as Ekkielsbakkie, and afterwards Ross and 
Moray, with more than half of Scotland, over which Thorstein ruled, as 
recorded in the Landnama-bok. 

About 963, Sigurd, son of Earl Hlodver, and his wife Audna (the daugh- 
ter of the Irish king Kiarval), became ruler over Ross and Moray, Suther- 
land and the Dales (of Caithness), which seems also to have included old 
Strathnavar. Sigurd married, secondly, the daughter of Malcolm (Malbrigid), 
called King of Scotland. He was slain at Clontarf near Dublin, in 10 14. 
By his first marriage he left issue, Sumarlidi, Brusi, and Einar, who divided 
the Orkneys between them. By his second marriage he had issue, Thorfinn, 
on whom King Malcolm bestowed the earldom of Caithness. 

To quote from the introduction, Njal Saga, by Dasent [Saga of Burnt 
Njal, George Webbe Dasent, 1861], "Ireland knew them [the Vikings] 
Bretland or Wales knew them, England knew them too well, and a great part 
of Scotland they had made their own. To this day the name of almost every 
island on the west coast of Scotland is either pure Norse, or Norse distorted, 
so as to make it possible for Celtic lips to utter it. The groups of Orkney 
and Shetland are notoriously Norse ; but Lewis and the Uists, and Skye 
and Mull are no less Norse, and not only the names of the islands them- 
selves, but those of reefs and rocks, and lakes, and headlands, bear witness 
to the same relation, and show that, while the original inhabitants were not 
expelled, but held in bondage as thralls, the Norsemen must have dwelt and 
dwelt thickly too, as conquerors and lords." 

The foregoing extract gives a description which investigation corrobor- 
ates. The blank in the history of Galloway after the termination of the 
Strathcluyd kingdom is now fully met. The only difficulty is to determine 
at what date Galloway became separated from Strathcluyd. Earl (Jarl) 
Malcolm, who lived near Whithorn in 1014, is the first Norseman specially 
named. His place of residence is believed to have been Cruggleton Castle, 
of historic renown in after-times. Eogan the Bald, who fought at Carham, 
and died in 1018, was the last King of Strathcluyd. We have thus only a 
difference of four years, and certain it is that Earl Malcolm was in Galloway, 
and evidently located there as one in possession. In the Burnt Njal we find 
the following : " They (Norsemen) then sailed north to Berwick (the Sol- 
way), and laid up their ship, and fared up into Whithorn in Scotland, and 
were with Earl Malcolm that year." . . . 

Another point certain from close investigation is, that Jarl (Earl) Thor- 
finn (son of Sigurd II.) ruled over Galloway in 1034, the time mentioned, 
and continued to do so until his death in 1064 or 1066 [1057]. In 1034 
he was twenty-seven years of age. In Scottish history we learn nothing of 
him, although in possession of a large part of Scotland. During his lifetime 
he ruled Galloway from Solway to Carrick. The Flateyjarbok contains the 
Orkneyinga Saga complete in successive portions : and in Munch's Historie 
et Chronicon Mannice, Earl Thorfinn is distinctly mentioned. 

It is also related that the Earl Gille had married a sister of Sigurd II., 
and acted as his lieutenant in the Sudreys. He is said to have resided at 
Koln, either the island of Coll or Colonsay ; and when Sigurd fell at Clon- 
tarf in 1014, he took Thorfinn, the youngest son, under his protection, while 
the elder brothers went to the Orkneys, and divided the northern dominions 

The Norse and Galloway 249 

amongst them. The two elder brothers died early in life, and Brusi accepted 
a pension for his claim ; therefore, when Thorfinn grew up he found himself 
possessed of nine earldoms in Scotland, to which he added all Galloway. 
Munch thinks they were Caithness, Sutherland, Ross, Moray, Buchan, Athol, 
Lorn, Argyle, and Galloway. To quote from Munch : " The Orkneyinga 
Saga says so expressly." 

Outliving his elder brothers, he (Thorfinn) became the Lord of Orkney 
and Shetland ; Caithness was given to him by his maternal grandfather, and 
after the death of Malcolm . . . he . . . conquered Sutherland and Ross, 
and made himself lord of Galloway, in the widest sense of this denomination 

— viz., from Solway to Carrick — where he resided for long periods, and 
whence he made successful inroads, sometimes on Cumberland, sometimes 
upon Ireland. He possessed, besides the Sudreys and part of Ireland, not 
less than nine earldoms in Scotland, etc. As Munch further states, all the 
Hebrides and a large kingdom of Ireland were also his. The Skeld Arnor, 
who personally visited him, and made a poem in his honour, testifies in it that 
his kingdom extended from Thurso rocks to Dublin. He also mentions 
that Thorfinn obtained possession of eleven earldoms in Scotland, all the 
Sudreyar (Hebrides), and a large territory in Ireland. He further states 
that Thorfinn sent men into England to foray, and then, having collected a 
force from the places named, he sailed from England, where he had two 
pitched battles : as Arnor gives it — " South of Man did these things 

This is contemporary evidence. In 1035, when Rognwald arrived from 
Norway, Thorfinn was much occupied in Scotland, and they made an alli- 
ance by which Rognwald was to have his part of Orkney free of contest, 
under condition of assisting Thorfinn with all the forces he could command. 
This alliance lasted ten years, and during that time Thorfinn made many 
incursions into England and Ireland. He generally resided in the south 
during the summer months, and in Caithness, or rather the Orkney and 
Shetland Isles, during the winter. They quarrelled, however, and Rogn- 
wald was slain in 1045. Thorfinn died about 1064 [? ], 34 says Munch, or 
sixty years after King Malcolm ... so far as the exact dates can be ascer- 
tained. . . . 

In regard to Thorfinn, it is stated that he " resided long at Caithness in 
a place called Gaddgedlar, where England and Scotland meet." Munch 
correctly insists that Gaddgedlar meant Galloway, 35 which at the period 
extended to Annan on one side and Carrick on the other, in its widest sense 

— or, in other words, the south-western part of Scotland, from Annandale 
on the Solway to Carrick opposite Kintyre — and therefore, in the true sense 
of the word, the boundary towards England. Munch was too careful a 
writer to confuse such a subject, and gave as his opinion that the sentence 
was incomplete, having been incorrectly copied from the original MS. This 
belief has been proved to be correct, as we will hereafter show. . . . 

We have had much assistance from other eminent Norse scholars, but 
that Gaddgedlar meant Galloway has been confirmed beyond dispute by 
the late G. Vigfusson, who communicated to us privately the missing passage 
before his Collection of Sagas was in the press. He found it in a Danish 
translation, made in a.d. 16 15, and preserved in Stockholm, from an ancient 
Icelandic vellum, which is no longer in existence. The existing printed text 
of the Orkneyinga Saga was founded on the Flateyensis only. The passage 
in its purity is, " Sat Porfinner jarl longum a Katanesi en Rognvaldr i 
Eyjum. Pat var a einu sumri at Porfinnr jarl herjadi um Sudreyjar ok 

250 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

vestan um Skotland. Hann la par sem Gaddgedlar heita, par maetist Skot- 
land ok England. Hann hafdi gibrk fra ser lid sudr a England at Strand- 
hoggi." The rough translation is : " Earl Thorfinn dwelt for the most part 
in Caithness, but Rognwald in the Isles. One summer Earl Thorfinn made 
war in the Hebrides and the west of Scotland. He lay at the place called 
Gaddgedlar, where Scotland and England meet. He had sent some from 
himself men to England for a strand-head (coast foray)." We will give Mr. 
Vigfusson's notes, which he sent to us in regard to the foregoing : (1) " ' En 
Rognwaldr. Hann la,' is taken from the translation — the careless copyist of 
the Flateyensis having here omitted and transposed a whole important pass- 
age. The suggestion of the late Norse historian, P. A. Munch, is thus 
conclusively proved to be true, both as to the identification of Gaddgedlar- 
Galloway (the translator spells it Gaardgellar), as also the unsound state of 
the text. Munch surmised that after ' Katanesi ' something, the copula 
* ok ' or the like, had been dropped out. It now is found that a whole sen- 
tence has been omitted or transposed. (2) We have followed the translator, 
where the text runs thus : ' Gaardgellar der modis Engeland oc, Scotland 
da harf" de han Sendt nogen af sin Krigs folck hen paa Engeland, etc' The 
Flateyensis is here all confusion. As we have shown, Thorfinn ruled over a 
large part of Scotland and a part of Ireland. He also carried his sway to 
portions of England, and at one time was chief of the Thingmen. He went 
to Rome, supposed about a.d. 1050, saw the Pope, and obtained absolution 
for all his sins. His position is thus shown to have been not only that of a 
warrior, but also of a conqueror." 

That Galloway was under his sway is clear. This opinion is fully enter- 
tained among the learned in Copenhagen ; and as mentioned to us, arising 
from our investigations, great interest has been evinced in the universities 
there in regard to Galloway, considering it at one time to have belonged to 
the sea-kings. It thus appears to us as very strange how the occupation of 
the districts, in the full sense, by the Norsemen has escaped the notice of 
those who have entered on Galloway history. 

The desire to make the Fergus line of lords of Galloway the ancient 
inheritors has blinded research. If the character of the people had only 
been considered, such an omission would not have occurred ; for we think 
no one will be bold enough to dispute the fact that the fortresses on the 
coast were built by the Norsemen. Having incurred such labor, is it to be 
supposed for one moment that they were erected as coast ornaments, or that 
the fierce natives of Galloway would have permitted such erections if they 
had not been subdued ? All the Danish records tell us of a conquered 
people. The fortresses never could have been built under other circum- 
stances. . . . 

There can, we think, be no question that the principal fortresses in 
Galloway were erected in the time of Jarls, or Earls, Malcolm and Thorfinn, 
long before the appearance of King Magnus, styled in the annals, Chroni- 
cum Scotorum, as King of Lachlann. His descent was in 1093. He 
returned to Norway in 1099. In 1102 he came back, and was killed in 
Connaught, Ireland, in 1103. He was buried in St. Patrick's Church, Down. 
He only reigned over the Western Isles for six years, when he was succeeded 
by Olave, who was a pacific prince, and his confederacy with Ireland and 
Scotland so close, that no one presumed to disturb the peace of these isles 
while he lived. He married Affrica, daughter of Fergus, Lord of Galloway. 
The Inquisitio Davidis, a nearly contemporary document, particularly notices 
the influx of a Gentile, alias heathen, population, and this could only be the 

The Norse and Galloway 251 

Norsemen, as both Irish, Scots, and Saxons (so-called) were Christians, in 
theory at least, for two or three centuries before that time. . . . 

The Northern sagas, 870-75, show that the mass of the population then 
in Galloway was of the Cymric race, sometimes called Brythons ; but the 
Irish-Scots or Gaels, from the counties Antrim and Down, the particulars in 
regard to whom we have already given, must also have been numerous, for 
in 876 the Cymri were under their rule, and those who would not submit to 
the yoke retreated to Wales to rejoin their countrymen in that quarter. . . . 
The Norsemen have left various marks of their occupation of Galloway in 
the names of places and also in surnames. 

Under the alleged Saxon occupation, which is erroneous, we have referred 
to Boreland, Ingleston, and Carleton, at pp. 87, 88. The first two are from 
the Norse, and the last from an Irish personal name. The Lothians were 
for a time in the possession of the Anglo-Saxons (so-called), and yet, after 
careful investigation, the first is not to be found there, and the second, only 
once, in West Lothian. We find a Boreland in Peeblesshire, a property so 
called in Cumnock parish, and Boarland in Dunlop parish, Ayrshire. There 
are also lands so called in Dumfriesshire, near the mouth of the Nith, which 
Timothy Pont gives in his survey as North, Mid, and South Bordland. The 
Borelands in Galloway are so numerous that we must deal with them as one, 
for there are fourteen farms with the name in the Stewartry, and three in 

In Brewer's Dictionary of Phrase and Fable, Bordlands is interpreted to 
mean " lands kept by lords in Saxon times for the supply of their own 
board or table/' This approaches the true meaning, and is all that can be 
found until we come to the Norse, when it is cleared up. We find in the 
Orkneys, where the Norsemen's headquarters were, that part of the ancient 
estate of the jarls (earls) of Orkney and Shetland consisted of the " bord- 
lands," which were the quarters of the jarls when occasionally travelling 
through the islands, and therefore exempt from skatt, the tax upon all land 
occupied by the Udellers or Odellers, for the expense of government. This 
skatt, or scat, was an ancient land-tax payable to the Crown of Norway. 
Skatt in Norse is to make tributary, and skatt-lsind is tributary land. The 
Udellers held land by uninterrupted succession without any original charter, 
and without subjection to feudal service, or the acknowledgment of any 
superior. The exemption of the "bordlands" from skatt or land-tax is 
shown in some old rentals of Orkney. In a rental dated 30th April, 1503, 
there is the following entry : " Memorandum, That all the Isle of Hoy is of 
the aid Erldome and Bordland, quhilk payit nevir scat." There are several 
similar entries relating to other Bordlands in the same rental. In a later 
rental, bearing date 1595, there are several farms entered — viz., " Hanga- 
back, na scat, quia Borland," etc. Numerous other entries of the same 
description are given. . . . That the Borelands in Galloway have a 
similar derivation as those in the Orkneys cannot be doubted. The old 
spelling in Galloway is " Bordland," as the old deeds will show. The same 
refers to the lands already mentioned at the mouth of the Nith, Dumfries- 
shire side. Bordland, in fact, appears to be the proper spelling throughout 
Scotland. . . . 

The other special name is Engleston or Ingleston, which we mentioned 
at p. 87. In regard to it there are at least two opinions, one being that it is 
derived from " English," and another from the Scottish " ingle," a chimney, 
or rather fireplace. There are several farms bearing the name in Galloway, 
and one so called in West Lothian. In a charter granted by King David II., 

252 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

lands so called have it spelled Inglynstoun, and in another charter by Robert 
II., it is Inglystoun (Robertson's Index of Charters). Pont, in his map 
drafted between 1608-20, spells it " Englishtoun," which cannot be accepted, 
for it is obviously incorrect. The surname of Inglis found in Scotland is the 
root of this error, as the assumption has been that it is a corruption of 
" English " ; but opposed to this idea is the fact that although several indi- 
viduals named Inglis are to be found in the possession of lands at an early 
period, not one of them is styled of Ingliston or Inglystoun. The Inglises 
of Manner seem to have been the chief family, and they held the lands of 
Branksome or Branksholm, afterwards possessed by the Scotts (Buccleuch). 
The Ingliston in West Lothian probably got the name from Inglis of Cra- 
mond, the first of which family was a merchant in Edinburgh about 1560, 
the Reformation time. It has also been overlooked that " English " is a dis- 
tinct English surname borne by families in England, and any affinity with it 
and Inglis has no other basis than some similarity in sound. We still adhere 
to the same opinion as given by us in Lands and their Owners in Galloway, 
that the farms in Galloway called Engleston or Ingleston have nothing to do 
with the surname Inglis, or as Englishtoun ; but were given from the nature 
or character of the land, and are from the Norse engi for meadow-land, or a 
meadow, which is also found in Anglo-Saxon as ing or inge, a pasture, a 
meadow. . . . 

Worsaae mentions that the names of places ending in " by " are to be 
found only in the districts selected by the Norsemen for conquest or colo- 
nization — as Lockerby, in Dumfriesshire, Appleby and Sorby (a parish, and 
some farms corrupted to "bie"), in Wigtonshire, etc. Sorby is also to be 
found in North Yorkshire and Cumberland, where settlements existed. 
Camden mentions a peninsula called " Flegg," in Norfolk, where the Danes 
had settled, and that in a little compass of ground there were thirteen vil- 
lages ending in "by," a Danish word signifying a village or dwelling-place ; 
and hence the bi-lagines of the Danish writers, and the " by-laws " in Eng- 
land, come to signify such laws as are peculiar to each town or village. It 
is also sometimes in the form of bui, a dweller, an inhabitant, whereas baer 
or byr or bae means a village, etc. Pollbae, in Wigtonshire, should in correct 
form be Pollrbae, the marshy or boggy farm. We entered on this subject 
in our historical sketch to vol. ii. of Lands and their Owners in Galloway. It 
is of importance, as it goes to prove with other evidence what we have held 
to all along, that instead of a mere coast occupation, as generally believed, 
Galloway was in the full possession of the Norsemen. We were therefore 
glad to find in Professor MacKinnon's article, No. VI., on " The Norse 
Elements," published in the Scotsman, December 2, 1887, the following from 
his pen : " Beer, byr, ' a village,' becomes by, and marks the Danish settle- 
ment in England — Whitby, Derby, Selby, Appleby ; and in the Isle of Man, 
Dalby, Salby, Jurby. This form is not common in the Isles. There is 
Europie, ' beach village,' in Lewis, hence the ' Europa Point ' of the maps. 
There is Soroby in Tyree, and Soroba near Obam. Shiaba (Schabby in old 
records), on the south of Mull, contains the root. So do Nereby and Con- 
nisby {homing, a ' king's village ') in Islay, Canisby in Caithness, and Smerby 
in Kintyre." . . . 

To continue the general subject the word flow, well known in Gal- 
loway as donating marshy moorland, is from the Norse floi, for a marshy 

The names of places beginning or ending with garth or guard show where 
the Scandinavians were settled in gaarde or farms, which belonged to the 

The Norse and Galloway 253 

Danish chiefs, or Udellers (holdus from old Norsk holldr). Worsaae men- 
tions that these seem to have been the property of the peasants, on condition 
of their paying certain rents to their feudal lords, and binding themselves to 
contribute to the defence of the country. In Galloway we have Garthland 
and Cogarth as examples. Worsaae does not seem to have visited the dis- 
trict, but to have been in Dumfriesshire, as he refers to Tundergarth, Apple- 
garth, and Huntgarth. 

The Holms he also notices, which are to be found in Galloway and 
other parts of Scotland, also in England where the Norsemen had settle- 
ments. The name is from the Norse holmr, meaning an island in a loch or 
river, or a plain at the side of a river. In Orkney there are the parish and 
Sound so-called, also four islands. In Shetland there are three small islands, 
and at Skye there is one, etc. 

Among many other Norse names in Galloway, there is Tung or Tongue. 
Worsaae calls the " Kyles of Tongue," in Sutherlandshire, pure Norwegian. 

Fleet, the name of a river in Anwoth parish, is from the Norse fljot, pro- 
nounced in Anglo-Saxon yfotf. In the parish at Stoneykirk are the farms 
and bay of Float, locally stated to have been so called from the wreck of one 
of the ships of the Spanish Armada ; and to make it complete, the headland 
close to, corrupted from the Gaelic word monadh, the hill-head, to " Money- 
head," from money supposed to have been lost from the wreck. Such deriva- 
tions are erroneous. The name Float is from the Norse flott, which means 
a plain ; and the access from the bay, with the character of the farms so 
called, together with the history of the lands adjoining, fully bear out the 
Norse meaning. One of the Orkney Isles is called Flotta. It was the resi- 
dence of the historiographer appointed by the Crown of Norway to gather 
information ; his work was therefore called Codex Flotticenses. 

The Norse word Borg, given to a parish, is now spelled Borgue ; and Gata 
corrupted to Galtway. 

In the bay of Luce, or rather in the offing, are the " Scar Rocks," and 
without reference to them, Worsaae mentions sker or skjaer as the Norse for 
isolated rocks in the sea, which those we refer to truly are. Begbie (Bagbie) 
and Killiness are also Norse. 

The Norse names in Galloway are far from being exhausted, as will be 
found by reference to the parishes and lands given in Lands and their 
Owners in Galloway. 

Worsaae refers to Tinwald in Dumfriesshire as undoubtedly identical 
with Thingvall or Tingvold, the appropriate Scandinavian or Norse term for 
places where the Thing was held. Elsewhere he states that they settled 
their disputes and arranged their public affairs at the Things. In connection 
with this he mentions Dingwall in Cromarty, Tingwall in the Shetland Isles, 
and Tynewald or Tingwall in the Isle of Man. 

We will only add here one other word, and a well-known one over Scot- 
land — viz., kirk, which is from kirke, the Danish for church. In the old 
Norse it is kirkja. In the same language there is kirke-gaard or garth and 
kirkju-gardr, a kirk or churchyard. In the German it is kirche, and in 
Anglo-Saxon, church. 

Worsaae correctly mentions that old Irish authors called the inhabitants 
of Denmark Dublochlannoch — dark Lochlans — the word Lochlan with them 
being the usual appellation for Scandinavia. It is also given as Lochlin and 
Lochlann. In the Gaelic it is somewhat similar, as in that language Dubh- 
Lochlinneach means a Dane, and Fionn- Lochlinneach, a Norwegian. The lat- 
ter are also found called Finngheinte in Gaelic. Worsaae repeats that the 

254 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

best and oldest Irish chronicles distinguish between the light-haired Finn- 
Lochlannoch or Fionn-Lochlannaigh, the Norwegians, and the dark-haired 
Dubh-Lochlannoch or Dubh-Lochlannaigh, the Danes ; or, what is the same, 
between Dubhgall, Dubh-Ghoill, and Finngall, Fionn-Ghoill™ 


1 During the latter years of Kenneth's reign, a people appear in close association with 
the Norwegian pirates, and joining in their plundering expeditions, who are termed Gall- 
gaidhel. This name is formed by the combination of the two words " Gall," a stranger, a 
foreigner, and " Gaidhel," the national name of the Gaelic race. It was certainly first ap- 
plied to the people of Galloway, and the proper name of this province, Galweitha, is formed 
from Galwyddel, the Welsh equivalent of Gallgaidhel. It seems to have been applied to 
them as a Gaelic race under the rule of Galle or foreigners : Galloway being for centuries a 
province of the Anglic kingdom of Northumbria, and the term ' ' Gall " having been applied 
to the Saxons before it was almost exclusively appropriated to the Norwegian and Danish 
pirates. Towards the end of the eighth century the power of the Angles in Galloway seems 
to have become weakened, and the native races began to assert their independent action. 
— Celtic Scotland, vol. i., p. 311. 

9 See p. 208. 

3 " Deira was the district thus portioned out amongst the Northmen who peopled the 
ancient kingdom of Northumbria, whilst Bernicia and the territory of St. Cuthbert, between 
Tees and Tyne, seem to have been still occupied by a Saxon proprietary, to a certain extent 
in a dependent condition, as exemplified in the Wergilds of the Northern Leod, in which the 
Holdr is reckoned at twice the value of the Thegn. A sure and certain test of a colonization 
of this description is afforded by the topography of the districts thus allotted, the Caster and 
the By invariably marking the presence of the Northmen, not only as a dominant, but as an 
actual occupying class ; and as only four Bys are to be found to the northward of the Tees, 
whilst the Chester is traceable from Tees to Tweed, and in a few instances even beyond that 
river, it may be safely assumed that though the territory of St. Cuthbert was divided by 
Reginald Hy Ivar between his followers Skuli and Olaf, the Tees was the northern boundary 
of the actual settlement, and that Deira alone was ' roped out ' amongst the Danes. 

" The Caster and the By in Cumberland and Westmoreland tell at the present day of a 
considerable colonization amidst the bleak moorlands of the west, unconnected apparently 
with the Danes of the Yorkshire Trythings. . . . whilst beyond the Solway not a few 
Bys between the Annan and the Esk mark the encroachments of the Northmen in the east- 
ern division of modern Dumfriesshire, a few settlers penetrating into Galloway. Cannoby, 
Dunnaby, Wyseby, Perceby, Middleby, Lockerby, and Sibalby occur in Dumfriesshire, and 
Sorby and Appleby in Wigtonshire." — Scotland under her Early Kings, vol. ii., pp. 432, 


4 Annals of Ulster. 

6 871, Amlaiph et Imhar do thuidhecht a frithisi du Athacliath a Albain dibhcedaib long 
(came again to Athacliath from Alban with 200 ships), et praeda maxima hominum Anglo- 
rum et Britonum et Pictorum deducta est secum ad Hiberniam in captivitate. — Annals of 

6 Predictus exercitus [Danorum] se in duas partes divisit, una pars cum Haldene ad 
regionen Nordanhymbrorum secessit et earn vastavit et hyemavit juxta flumen quod dicitur 
Tine et totam gentem suo dominetui subdidit et Pictos atque Strathduccenses depopulati 
sunt. — Sim. Dun. 875, Congressio Pictorum for Dubgallu et strages magna Pictorum facta 
est.— An. Ult. 

1 English Chronicle, Anno 924. See p. 298. 

The Norse and Galloway 255 

8 Orkneyinga Saga, Coll. de Rebus Albanicis. See Appendix P. 

• " So it was that Scotland received a population of immigrants from Norway along the 
seaboard from Caithness to Fife. In Lothian and Northumberland they met and mingled 
with the people of a kindred race who had crossed from Jutland, Zealand, and Friesland to 
the coast of England. It is from the change that domesticated each successive horde of new- 
comers, that we lose all historical hold upon their coming as a separate fact, and have so 
much difficulty in identifying the leaders who brought them over. We cannot say where it 
was that the first man of Teutonic northern race set foot in Scotland, and whether he found 
the land empty or inhabited by Celts. But we know pretty well that from the fourth cen- 
tury to the tenth this race spread over the land that is now Lowland Scotland, and that if 
they found Celts there, these were pressed westwards to join the community of their fel- 
low-Celts that had crossed over from Ireland. 

4 ' Of the stormy history of which such scattered fragments only can be recovered, the 
general influence on the future of Scotland may be thus abbreviated : As far as the Firth of 
Forth stretched Northumbria, where the Norse element predominated. It gradually combined 
with kindred elements on the side of England, while northward of the firth there was a 
combination with fresh invaders from Scandinavia, and a general pressure on any remains 
of Celtic inhabitancy, if there were such remains, along the north-eastern districts — a pres- 
sure driving them westward into the mountain district peopled by their Irish kindred. 
Orkney became a province of Norway, with a tendency to stretch the power of that state 
over the adjoining mainland. The Hebrides and other islands along the west coast, so far 
as they held out any inducement for permanent settlement to the Scandinavian colonists, had 
a seat of government in the Isle of Man." — Burton, History of Scotland, vol. i., pp. 317, 330. 

10 " Such is the account given us by the saga of this war. Marianus supplements it by tell- 
ing us that in the year 1040, Donnchad, King of Scotia, was slain in autumn, on the 14th of 
August, by his general, Macbethad, son of Finnlaech, who succeeded him in the kingdom. 
Macbeth was at this time the Ri or Mormaor of the district of Myrhaevi or Moray, which 
finally became the seat of war, and when Duncan sent far and wide to the chieftains for aid, 
he probably came to his assistance with the men of Moray, and filled the place which Mod- 
dan had formerly occupied as commander of his army ; but the tie which united the mormaors 
of Moray with the kings of the Scots was still a very slender one. They had as often been 
subject to the Norwegian earls as they had been to the Scottish kings ; and when Duncan sus- 
tained this crushing defeat, and he saw that Thorfinn would now be able to maintain posses- 
sion of his hereditary territories, the interests of the Mormaor of Moray seem to have prevailed 
over those of the commander of the king's army, and he was guilty of the treacherous act of 
slaying the unfortunate Duncan, and attaching his fortunes to those of Thorfinn. 

"The authorities for the history of Macbeth knew nothing of Earl Thorfinn and his 
conquests. On the other hand, the sagas equally ignore Macbeth and his doings, and had to 
disguise the fact that Thorfinn was attacking his own cousin, and one who had derived his 
right to the kingdom from the same source from which Thorfinn had acquired his to the earl- 
dom of Caithness, by concealing his identity under the contemptuous name of Karl or Kali 
Hundason, while some of the chronicles have transferred to Macbeth what was true of Thor- 
finn, that he was also a grandson of King Malcolm, and a Welsh Chronicle denominates him 
King of Orkney. The truth seems to be that the conquest of the provinces south of Moray, 
which took place after this battle, was the joint work of Thorfinn and Macbeth, and that they 
divided the kingdom of the slain Duncan between them ; Thorfinn receiving the districts 
which had formerly been under his father, with the addition of those on the east coast extend- 
ing as far as Fife or the Firth of Tay. According to the Orkneyinga Saga, he possessed 
' nine earldoms in Scotland, the whole of the Sudreys, and a large riki in Ireland,' and this 
is confirmed by the St. Ola/'s Saga, which tells us that ' he had the greatest riki of any earl 
of Orkney ; he possessed Shetland and the Orkneys, the Sudreys, and likewise a great riki in 
Scotland and Ireland.' Macbeth obtained those in which Duncan's strength mainly lay — 

256 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

the district south and west of the Tay, with the central district in which Scone, the capital, is 
situated. Cumbria and Lothian probably remained faithful to the children of Duncan. " — 
Celtic Scotland, vol. i., pp. 403-405. 

To the existence of a Norwegian kingdom at this period lasting for thirty years, during 
which Macbeth ruled as a tributary of Thorfinn, I must equally demur. The chronicles of 
England, Scotland, and Ireland are silent upon this subject, whilst the sagas only say that 
Thorfinn plundered the country as far as Fife and returned to Caithness, where he dwelt 
" amongst the Gaddgedlar," every year fitting out a fleet for a course of piracy — the normal 
summer occupation of an Orkney jarl in that age. They make no allusion to his placing 
officers over the conquered districts, according to the invariable custom of the time ; and in 
describing his proceedings after his victory, their expressions are no stronger than upon the 
occasion of his marauding incursion upon England, with his nephew Rognwald, in the days 
of Hardacanute, when after a great victory the jarls are said to have ranged over all England 
in arms, slaying and burning in every quarter. The conqueror of Scotland, the main support 
of Macbeth, would have scarcely been obliged to yield a share in the Orkneys to his nephew 
Rognwald, backed by a force of three ships ; nor does Thorfinn seem to have been of a char- 
acter to allow his dependent to assume the title of king, whilst he was contented with that of 
jarl. A king ruling under a jarl would have been a novelty in history. The support given 
to Macbeth by the Norwegians, and the presence of a Saxon army at Lumphanan, are equally 
dubious ; for the Normans mentioned in connection with Siward's expedition four years 
before, were Osbern Pentecost, Hugh, and others, who had sought refuge at the Court of 
Macbeth about two years before the appearance of the Anglo-Danish Earl. (Flor. Wig., 
1054). — Scotland under her Early Kings, vol. ii., p. 478, 479. 

11 Celtic Scotland, vol. i., pp. 411-413. Professor Munch, in his Histori et Chronicon 
Mannice, names these districts as Caithness, Sutherland, Ross, Moray, Buchan, Athol, Lorn, 
Argyle, and Galloway. 

12 It is hardly possible that the tangled tale of Macbeth's murder of Duncan and his 
usurpation of the throne of Scotia will ever be clearly unravelled, but this much seems toler- 
ably certain, that Macbeth ruled in concert with the powerful Norse Earl Thorfinn, who suc- 
ceeded Earl Melkoff or Malcolm at Whithorn, and, according to the Chronicum Regum 
Mannia, " lived long at Gaddgeddli [Galloway], the place where England and Scotland 
meet." — Maxwell, History of Dumfries and Galloway, p. 43. 

13 We know, historically, that in the west, group after group of Norse invaders were 
absorbed into the Irish-speaking population. Although the Norsemen were conquerors of 
the Highland region, and gave it monarchs and lords, the more civilized language absorbed 
the ruder though fundamentally stronger, and all spoke the Irish tongue together. Thus, in 
language, the Teutonic became supreme in the eastern Lowlands, the Celtic among the 
western mountains. From a'general view of the whole question, an impression — but nothing 
stronger than an impression — is conveyed, that the proportion of the Teutonic race that came 
into the use of the Gaelic is larger than the proportion of the Celtic race that came into the 
use of the Teutonic or Saxon. Perhaps students of physical ethnology may thus account for 
the contrasts of appearance in the Highlands ; in one district the people being large-limbed 
and fair, with hair inclined to red ; in others, small, lithe, and dusky, with black hair. — 
Burton, History of Scotland ', vol. i., p. 207. 

It is remarked by Worsaae [Jeus Jacob Asmussen Worsaae, Account of the Danes and 
Northmen in England, Scotland, and Ireland, 185 1 J, that the language of the Lowlands of 
Scotland is so much like that of Scandinavia that seamen wrecked on the coasts of Jutland 
and Norway [are reputed to] have been able to converse without difficulty in their mother 
tongue with the people there [?]. Also, that the popular language of the Lowlands contains 
a still greater number of Scandinavian words and phrases than even the dialect of the North 
of England. He states, in addition, that the near relationship of the North Englishmen with 
the Danes and other Scandinavians is reflected both in popular songs and in the folk-lore, and 

The Norse and Galloway 257 

is even more so in the Scottish Lowlands, whither great immigrations of Northmen took 
place. Modern Scandinavian has changed considerably ; but in the Icelandic, which is pure, 
its affinity with the ancient Scottish is great. The Lord's Prayer in the two languages, as 
given by Pinkerton, will show this. The orthography and pronunciation constitute the 
principal difference. It is obvious that the assimilation of Icelandic into Scottish was attended 
with no difficulty. It was considered by some writers — and truly so, we think, from the 
character and customs of the people, — that the Scandinavian poetry gave to the Scottish 
some of its wildness, added greatly to by the Celtic element. It is stated that the Scandina- 
vian and the Scottish music scales are very similar. Worsaae mentions, as we have already 
stated, that it was a special trait of the Scandinavians that they very quickly accommodated 
themselves to the manners and customs of the countries where they settled. They even 
sometimes quite forgot their mother tongue, without, however, losing their original and 
characteristic national stamp. The well-known " raven," called the Danebrog of heathenism, 
which was borne for centuries, and viewed with superstitious awe in the British Isles as well 
as elsewhere, was not put aside for long after they became Christianized. According to 
Worsaae, it was borne until about A.D. noo ; but a Galloway legend brings it to a date some 
years later. — Galloway, Ancient and Modern, p. 112. 

14 Ayrshire is divided by the rivers Doon and Irvine into three districts — Carrick, Kyle, 
and Cunninghame. At what period these three were erected into a sheriffdom is not precisely 
known. Wyntoun, the venerable and generally accurate chronicler of Scotland, speaking of 
the wars of Alpin with the Picts, says : 

" He wan of were all Galluway ; 

Thare wes he slayne, and dede away." 

As the death of Alpin occurred in 741, near Dalmellington, on the north banks of the 
Doon, it may be inferred that Ayrshire was then an integral part of Galloway. Yet, though 
this was the case, it is well known that there were no sheriffs under the purely Celtic rule of 
the country, which prevailed until the eleventh century ; and from charters of David I. it is 
evident that in his reign, if not previously, the boundaries of Galloway had been greatly 
limited. — Paterson, History of the County of Ayr, p. 1. 

44 Galloway anciently comprehended not only the country now known by that name, and 
the Stewartry of Kirkcudbright, but also the greatest part, if not the whole, of Ayrshire. It 
had its own princes and its own laws. It acknowledged, however, a feudatory dependence 
on Scotland. This dependence served only to supply the sovereign with rude undisciplined 
soldiers, who added rather to the terror than to the strength of his armies. 

44 Even at so late a period as the reign of Robert Bruce, the castle of Irvine was accounted 
to be in Galloway. There is reason to suppose that a people of Saxon origin encroached by 
degrees on the ancient Galloway. The names of places in Cuningham are generally Saxon. 
The name of the country itself is Saxon. In Kyle there is some mixture of Saxon. All the 
names in Carrick are purely Gaelic." — Lord Hailes, Annals of Scotland, vol. i., p. 118. 

18 We cannot, certainly, infer, from this Life [of Ninian] that there were any Picts in 
Galloway, at this period. Ninian, as will be elsewhere seen, goes from Whithorn into the 
country of the Southern Picts to convert that idolatrous people. . . . 4 * There is extant," 
says Usher, <4 among our Irish, a Life of the same Ninian, in which he . . . is reported 
to have had, also, a brother, St. Plebeia by name, as we read in his Life by John of 
Tinmouth." — Ritson, Annals of the Caledonians, Picts, etc., vol. ii., pp. 140, 141. 

16 In that region it is supposed in the western part of the island of Britain where the 
ocean stretching as an arm, and making, as it were, on either side two angles, divideth at this 
day [11 50] the realms of the Scots and Angles, which, till these last times belonging to 
the Angles, is proved not only by historical record, but by actual memory of individuals to 
have had a king of its own. — Ailred, Vita Niniani, ch. i. 

11 Ailred, Life of Ninian, ch. iv. 

258 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

18 It is perhaps to Whithorn, therefore, alone among the towns of Scotland, that honour 
is due for having maintained the worship of the Almighty uninterrupted for fifteen hundred 
years. — Maxwell, History of Dumfries and Galloway, p. 3. 

Whit-herne (Saxon) implies the white-house ; the signification, likewise, of Louko-pibia 
and Candida-casa. This famous mansion was situate upon the continental peninsula of Gal- 
loway, now Wigtonshire, where, or near which, Fergus, Lord of Galloway, between seven and 
eight centuries afterward, founded a priory of the same name ; and not (as has been asserted) 
upon the little island at the point of it. "Candida casa vocatur locus in extremis Angliae 
juxta Scotiam finibus, ubi beatus Ninia requiescit, natione Britto, qui primus ibidem Christi 
praedicationem evangelizavit. Sanctum hunc Ninian prseclarum virtutibus experta est anti- 
quitas. Scribit, Alcuinus, in epistola ad fratres ejusdem loci dicens : Deprecor vestrae 
pietatis unanimitatem ut nostri nominis habeatis memoriam in ecclesia sanctissimi patris 
vestri Niniae episcopi, qui multis claruit virtutibus, sicut mihi nuper delatum est per carmina 
matricse artis, quae nobis per fideles nostros discipulos Eboracensis ecclesiae scholastica directa 
sunt, in quibus et facientis cognovi eruditionem, et facientis miracula sanctitatem." (William 
of Malmesbury, De Ges. Pon., book iii.) — Ritson, Annals of Galloway. 

19 Maxwell, History of Dumfries and Galloway, p. 29. 

20 Bede, book v. , ch. xxiii. 

But the Attecott Picts did undergo about this time a very important change in their 
foreign relations. The successors of Edwin, King of Bernicia, became, as the price of their 
alliance, ard-righ or over-lords of Galloway, and under them the native chiefs ruled the 
people. — Maxwell, History of Dumfries and Galloway, p. 36. 

That part of Galloway which lay along the sea-coast, or at the greatest distance from 
the seat of government, was now overrun by the Northumbrian Saxons who made settle- 
ments in it. The farms which are still styled Inglestons are thought to have derived 
their name from the Angles who then possessed them, and motes seem generally to 
have been in their vicinity. Those slaves whom they employed in tilling the ground were 
termed boors, and the places which they inhabited or occupied are still named Boorlands. 
The lands called " Carletons" also obtained their name from the ceorles, or middle class of 
society among the Saxons ; the thanes being the highest and the slaves the lowest. — Macken- 
zie, History of Galloway, vol. i., p. 130. These derivations are discussed by Mr. MacKerlie, 
who ascribes them to the Norse and Gaelic settlers, rather than to the Angles. See p. 247. 

21 741, battle of Drum Cathmail between the Cruithnigh and the Dalriads against 
Innrechtach. — Annals of Ulster. 

22 While riding through a ford in Glenapp he was killed by a man hidden in a wood, and 
his burial-place is marked to this day by a large stone called Laicht Alpin, Alpin's Grave, 
which gives the name to the farm of Laicht on which it stands. — Maxwell, History of Dum- 
fries and Galloway, p. 37. 

He crossed from Kintyre to Ayr, and then moved southwards. A great deal of miscon- 
ception has accompanied his movements. Wyntoun has been implicitly believed, who wrote 
his Chronicle about 700 years after the event, and has not been considered altogether 
trustworthy in regard to other matters. And he has rendered it — 

" He wan of werre all Galloway, 

There wes he slayne, and dede away." 

The story of the devastation of the district rests on these lines. There is no doubt that he 
never overran Wigtonshire, nor was even in it. He was only on the borders of present Gal- 
loway, and there was slain, not in battle, as is generally supposed, but by an assassin who lay 
in wait for him at the place, near Loch Ryan, where the small burn separates Ayrshire from 
Wigtonshire. An upright pillar stone marks the spot, and was called Laicht Alpin, which 
in the Scoto-Irish means the stone or grave of Alpin. — Galloway, Ancient and Modern, p. 65. 
83 Bede, continuation of Chronicle, Anno 750. 

The Norse and Galloway 259 

Kyle, according to Buchanan, was so designated from Coilus, King of the Britons, who 
was slain and interred in the district. The learned historian informs us that a civil war having 
ensued between the Britons who occupied the south and west of Scotland, and the Scots and 
the Picts, who were settled in the north and north-west, the opposing armies met near the 
banks of the Doon ; and that, by a stratagem, Coilus, who had dispatched a portion of his 
forces northward, was encompassed between the Scots and Picts, and completely routed. He 
was pursued, overtaken, and slain in a field or moor, in the parish of Tarbolton, which still 
retains the name of Coilsfield, or Coilus's field. Modern inquirers have regarded this as one of 
the fables of our early history. Tradition corroborates the fact of some such battle having 
been fought. — Paterson, History of the County of Ayr, vol. i., p. 2. 

24 Eadberct's forces arrived in time to reinforce Innrechtach in pursuing Alpin's defeated 
army. The result was that all Carrick and Kyle were added to the Northumbrian realm. This 
was the high-tide mark of Saxon dominion in the north. Its chronicles during the latter half 
of the eighth century show that the domestic difficulties of the Northumbrian over-lords of 
Galloway had become so pressing as to divert them from all thought of further conquest. 
— Maxwell, History of Dumfries, p. 38. 

These nations had now resumed their normal relation to each other — east against west 
— the Picts and Angles again in alliance, and opposed to them the Britons and the Scots. 
Simeon of Durham tells us that in 744 a battle was fought between the Picts and the 
Britons, but by the Picts, Simeon usually understands the Picts of Galloway, and this battle 
seems to have followed the attack upon them by Alpin and his Scots. It was followed by a 
combined attack upon the Britons of Alclyde by Eadberct of Northumbria, and Angus, king 
of the Picts. The chronicle annexed to Bede tells us that in 750 Eadberct added the plain of 
Cyil with other regions to his kingdom. This is evidently Kyle in Ayrshire, and the other 
regions were probably Carrick and Cuninghame, so that the king of Northumbria added to 
his possessions of Galloway on the north side of the Solway the whole of Ayrshire. — Celtic 
Scotland, vol. i., pp. 294-5. 

Connected with the three divisions of Ayrshire there is the old rhyme of 

" Kyle for a man, 

Carrick for a coo, 
Cuninghame for butter and cheese, 
And Galloway for woo." 

These, and similar popular and traditionary lines, are worthy of preservation ; as they con- 
stitute, as it were, popular landmarks in statistics, which supply a ready test to the changes 
that come over a district. Some contend for a different reading, making 

" Carrick for a man, 
Kyle for a cow," 

but the first would seem to be the proper one. It is the one most general, and as old as the 
days of Bellenden. — Paterson, History of the County of Ayr, vol. i., p. 4. 

86 Gradually the Viking pirates crept round the Caledonian shores ; their black kyuls 
found as good shelter in the lochs of the west as in the fiords of Norway and the Baltic, 
whence they had sailed. Iona fared no better than Lindisfarne, and now it seemed as if the 
pagan torch must fire the sacred shrine of St. Ninian at Whithorn. But to the warlike 
prowess of their Attecott ancestors these Picts of Galloway seem to have added the talent of 
far-seeing diplomacy, by means of which the Norsemen, instead of desolating their land like 
the rest with fire and sword, were induced to fraternise with them and make common cause. 
What were the terms paid by Christians for their alliance with pagans can never now be re- 
vealed. It is plain from the place-names of Norse origin scattered through the Stewartry 
and the shire, among those in Gaelic and Saxon speech, that there was a permanent Scandi- 
navian settlement there, but we are left to imagine whether the relations between the two 

260 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

races were those of over-lords and tributary, or whether they merely became fellow-pirates. 
At all events the connection cost the Galloway men the respect of other Celtic communities. 
The Irish chronicler, MacFirbis, declares that they renounced their baptism and had the 
customs of the Norsemen, and it is in the ninth century that they first appear mentioned as 
Gallgaidhel, or foreign Gaels, taking with the Vikings part in plundering and devastation. 
So it came to pass that their monastery of Candida Casa was spared. — Maxwell, History of 
Dumfries and Galloway , pp. 38, 39. 

" What most hindered the complete reduction of the Danelaw was the hostility to the 
English rule of the states north of it, the hostility of Bernicia, of Strathclyde, and, above all, 
of the Scots. The confederacy against ^thelstan had been brought together by the intrigues 
of the Scot king, Constantine ; and though Constantine, in despair at his defeat, left the throne 
for a monastery, the policy of his son Malcolm was much the same as his father's. Eadmund 
was no sooner master of the Danelaw than he dealt with this difficulty in the north. The 
English blood of the Bernicians was probably drawing them at last to the English monarch, 
for after Brunanburh we hear nothing of their hostility. But Cumbria was far more import- 
ant than Bernicia, for it was through Cumbrian territory that the Ostmen [of Ireland] could 
strike most easily across Britain into the Danelaw. . . . 

" Under Eadberht the Northumbrian supremacy had reached as far as the district of Kyle 
in Ayrshire ; and the capture of Alclwyd by his allies, the Picts, in 756, seemed to leave the 
rest of Strathclyde at his mercy. But from that moment the tide had turned ; a great defeat 
shattered Eadberht's hopes ; and in the anarchy which followed his reign district after district 
must have been torn from the weakened grasp of Northumbria, till the cessation of the line 
of her bishops at Whithern (Badulf , the last bishop of Whithern of the Anglo-Saxon succes- 
sion whose name is preserved, was consecrated in 791. Sim. Durh. ad. ann.) tells that her 
frontier had been pushed back almost to Carlisle. But even after the land that remained to 
her had been in English possession for nearly a century and a half it was still no English land. 
Its great land-owners were of English blood, and as the Church of Lindisfarne was richly 
endowed here, its priesthood was probably English too. But the conquered Cumbrians had 
been left by Ecgfrith on the soil, and in its local names we find few traces of any migration 
over moors from the east. . . . 

' ' Along the Irish Channel the boats of the Norwegian pirates were as thick as those 
of the Danish corsairs on the eastern coast ; and the Isle of Man, which they conquered and 
half colonized, served as a starting-point from which the marauders made their way to the 
opposite shores. Their settlements reached as far northward as Dumfriesshire, and south- 
ward, perhaps, to the little group of northern villages which we find in the Cheshire peninsula 
of the Wirral. But it is the lake district and in the north of our Lancashire that they lie 
thickest. . . . While this outlier of northern life was being planted about the lakes, the 
Britons of Strathclyde were busy pushing their conquests to the south ; in Eadmund's day, 
indeed, we find their border carried as far as the Derwent ; but whether from the large space 
of Cumbrian ground they had won, or no, the name of Strathclyde from this time disappears, 
and is replaced by the name of Cumbria. Whether as Strathclyde or Cumbria, its rulers 
had been among the opponents of the West-Saxon advance ; they were among the confeder- 
ates against Eadward as they were among the confederates against /Ethelstan ; and it was no 
doubt in return for a like junction in the hostilities against himself that Eadmund, in 945, 
' harried all Cumberland.' But he turned his new conquest adroitly to account by using it to 
bind to himself the most dangerous among his foes ; for he granted the greater part of it to 
the Scottish king, on the terms that Malcolm should be ' his fellow- worker by sea and land.' 
In the erection of this northern dependency we see the same forces acting, though on a more 
distant field, which had already begun the disintegration of the English realm in the formation 
of the great earldormanries of the eastern coast. Its immediate results, however, were advan- 
tageous enough. Scot and Welshman, whose league had till now formed the chief force of 
opposition to English supremacy in the north, were set at variance ; the road of the Ostman 

The Norse and Galloway 261 

was closed, while the fidelity of the Scot king seemed to be secure by the impossibility 
of holding Cumbria against revolt without the support of his ' fellow-worker ' in the south." 
— Green, Conquest of England \ ch. vi., sees. 14-17. 

26 Celtic Scotland, vol. i., p. 132. 

27 Sir Herbert Maxwell, History of Dumfries and Galloway, p. 51. 

In this battle, says Lambarde, " After that the bishop of Durham had exhorted the soldiers 
to fighte, the Scottes cryed out ' Albany ! Albany ! ' after their own manner, as thoughe al had 
bene theires. But the Englishe souldyours sent amongst them suche hayle of schott that 
after a whyle they turned their backes, and, in fine, theare was slayne of theim to the number 
of 11,000, and they weare, for their brag of Albany, mocked with ' Yry, Yry, Standard ! ' a 
terme of great reproach at that time, as Matthew Paris witnesseth " ; in whose work, however, 
no such thing is to be found. — Ritson, Annals of Galloway, p. 264. 

88 The enmity between the Strathclyde Britons and Ulstermen would tend to make the 
Galloway Picts throw in their lot with their congeners of Ulster, and no doubt intercourse 
between them was frequent and generally amicable, leading to intermarriage and relationship 
of blood. But there is not the least ground for believing that Galloway was overrun at this 
time in a hostile sense by the people from the opposite Irish coast. — Maxwell, History of 
Dumfries and Galloway, p. 36. 

" The portion of the Pictish people which longest retained the name were the Picts of 
Galloway. Completely surrounded by the Britons of Strathclyde, and isolated from the rest 
of the Pictish nation, protected by a mountain barrier on the north, and the sea on the west 
and south, and remaining for centuries under the nominal dominion of the Angles of North- 
umbria, they maintained an isolated and semi-independent position in a corner of the island, 
and appear as a distinct people under the name of Picts as late as the twelfth century, when 
they formed one division of the Scottish army at the battle of the Standard. . . 

** We find, therefore, that in this remote district, in which the Picts remained under their 
distinctive names as a separate people as late as the twelfth century, a language considered 
the ancient language of Galloway was still spoken as late as the sixteenth century, and that 
language was Gaelic." — Celtic Scotland, vol. i., pp. 202-204. 

29 It will thus be seen that to those in North Antrim, the Mull of Kintyre, only fourteen 
miles distant, being in sight, and with countrymen already settled in Argyleshire, easy means 
offered for leaving Hibernia ; and, as recorded, a colony passed over in A.d. 498, under the 
leadership of Fergus Mor Mac Earca. . . . There is not such special mention to be 
found of the southern movement, but there cannot be a doubt that in the same way the Irish 
Scoti in Down, etc. — southern Dalriada — being opposite to Galloway, only twenty-two 
miles distant, and always more or less to be seen, except in thick weather, it offered an 
inducement for them to pass over there, and more particularly as communication seems to 
have existed previously with Galloway, which there is reason to believe was constant. That 
such an exodus took place is supported by the people found in Galloway after the Roman 
period. As we have already mentioned, Chalmers, in his Caledonia, gives the period of the 
settlement in the ninth and tenth centuries. We consider that it must have begun about the 
same time as the emigration to Argyleshire, while it was of a more gradual character, extend- 
ing over several centuries, and not an immediate rush, which will account for not a vestige of 
authority as argued by Dr. Skene. It is, however, mentioned in the Pictish Chronicle that 
the settlement was made about A.D. 850 by stratagem, when they slew the chief inhabitants, 
which latter statement is likely enough ; but this conveys that they had been in Galloway for 
some time, and had become numerous, thus supporting what we have mentioned, that the 
colonization had been gradual. — Galloway, Ancient and Modern, pp. 52, 53. 

30 " Alpin, king of the Scots of Dalriada (not to be confused with him who perished 
in Glenapp in 741), had been expelled from his kingdom by the Northern Picts. His son 
Kenneth (in Gaelic, Cinaedh), afterwards renowned as Kenneth MacAlpin, had taken refuge 
in Galloway. By the help of his relatives there, and the co-operation of the Norsemen, he 

262 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

was able to regain his kingdom of Dalriada and afterwards defeat the Northern Picts in the 
epoch-making battle of Fortrenn. . . . 

" It has been plausibly suggested that the right which for many centuries afterwards was 
undoubtedly claimed by and conceded to the men of Galloway to march in the van of Scottish 
armies, was conferred on them by Kenneth MacAlpin in recognition of their services at this 
momentous time. The new king certainly gave proof of the value set upon these services by 
giving his daughter in marriage to a Galloway chief called Olaf the White. 

" In the same year, 844, in which Kenneth was crowned King of Alban, the Gallgaidhel, 
or Picts of Galloway, assisted Olaf to seize the throne of Dublin. 

" On the death of Kenneth MacAlpin in 860, Olaf made a determined attempt on the 
crown of Alban. Inheritance among the Picts was invariably through the female line. 
Olaf's wife, being daughter to Kenneth, gave him a better claim under Pictish law than Ken- 
neth's son Constantin. In company with Imhair, Olaf captured Dumbarton in 872, and held 
a great part of Alban, retreating with much booty and many captives to Galloway, whence the 
whole party sailed in two hundred ships to Dublin." — Maxwell, History of Dumfries and 
Galloway \ pp. 40, 41. 

31 The name of Heathored occurs as the last amongst the bishops of Whithern in Flor. 
Wig. App., and his predecessor, Badwulf, is alluded to by Sim. Dun. under 796. The topo- 
graphy of Galloway and the language once spoken by the Galwegians (who acknowledged 
a Kenkinny — Cen-Cinnidh — not a Pen-cenedl) distinguish them from the British race 
of Strathclyde — the Walenses of the early charters as opposed to the Galwalenses. Beda, 
however, knew of no Picts in the diocese of Candida Casa (v. Appendix K), and consequently 
they must have arrived at some later period, though it would be difficult to point with cer- 
tainty to their original home. Some authorities bring them from Dalriada, making them 
Cruithne or Irish Picts ; and the dedication of numerous churches in Galloway to saints 
popular in the northeast of Uladh seems to favor their conjecture. The name of Galloway is 
probably traceable to its occupation by Gall, in this case Anglian strangers. — Robertson, 
Scotland under her Early Kings, vol. i., p. 21. 

32 A mighty devastation of Strathclyde and Galloway is recorded in 875 by Simeon of 
Durham, and this is corroborated in the Annals of Ulster, where reference is made to a 
bloody defeat of the Picts by the Dubhgall or Danes. 

33 " The next important personage to appear in Galloway history is Ronald the Dane, 
titular King of Northumbria, styled also Duke of the Galwegians, in right of the ancient 
superiority of the Saxon kings over the Picts. With Olaf of the Brogues (Anlaf Cuaran), 
grandson of Olaf the White, as his lieutenant, he drove the Saxons before him as far south as 
Tamworth. This was in 937, but in 944 the tide of victory rolled north again. King 
Eadmund drove Ronald out of Northumbria to take refuge in Galloway. Of this province he 
and his sons continued rulers till the close of the tenth century. But these were Dubhgalls or 
Danes, and they now fell to war with the Fingalls or Norse, who possessed themselves of the 
province. Galloway, on account of its central position between Ireland, Cumbria, and 
Strathclyde, and still more because of its numerous shallow bays and sandy inlets, so conve- 
nient for Viking galleys, was then in higher esteem than it has ever been since among mari- 
time powers. 

" Sigurd the Stout, Earl of Orkney, grandson of Thorfinnthe Skull-cleaver, was Lord of 
Galloway in 1008. His resident lieutenant was a native prince, Malcolm, whose name 
appears in the sagas as Earl Melkoff." — History of Dumfries and Galloway, p. 42. 

34 " In 1057 Malcolm Canmore — son of the murdered Duncan, — attacked the usurper 
Macbeth, defeated and slew him and became King Malcolm III., of Scotia. The great Earl 
Thorfinn having died in the same year, Malcolm most prudently married his widow Ingi- 
biorg, of the Pictish race, thereby bringing under his rule the Norse districts of Scotland, 
including Galloway. Consolidation was now the order of the day. The Norse influence, 
undermined by the effects of the battle of Clontarf , was steadily on the wane. The island 

The Norse and Galloway 263 

of Britain, soaked as it was with centuries of bloodshed, was resolving itself into the two 
main dominions of England and Scotland — a process which the Church, relieved from op- 
pression by the pagan Norsemen, lent her influence to accelerate. The native rulers of Gal- 
loway showed some hesitation as to the realm into which they would seek admission. 
Tradition and custom tempted them to union with their old over-lords the Saxon earls of 
Northumbria ; but the Saxon power was waning, as the Roman and the Norse had waned 
before. Geography as well as linguistic and racial affinity turned the scale, and the 
Galwegians became lieges of the Scottish king. 

44 In this manner closed the dominion of the Norsemen over Galloway, and such parts 
along the Solway shore of Dumfriesshire as they had been able to hold by force. Their 
strength ever lay in their ships, but of their handiwork some traces probably remain in a 
peculiar kind of cliff tower, which may be seen at various parts of the coast, such as Castle 
Feather and Cardhidoun near the Isle of Whithorn, and Port Castle on the shore of Glasser- 
ton parish." — Maxwell, pp. 43, 44. 

85 *' Gallwallia or Galwedia is termed in the Irish Annals Gallgaedhel, a name also ap- 
plied to the people of the Isles. The name of Galwedia in its more extended sense consisted 
of the districts extending from Solway to the Clyde ; but in its limited sense, in which it is 
used here, it is co-extensive with the modern counties of Wigton and Kirkcudbright. In the 
Norse sagas it is termed Gaddgeddli. 

44 Both districts of Ergadia and Gallwallia appear to have been to a great extent occu- 
pied by the Norwegians down to the period when these 4 reguli ' first appear. At the battle 
of Cluantarf in 1014, there is mention of the Galls or foreigners of Man, Sky, Lewis, Cantire, 
and Airergaidhel {Wars of Gaedel zuith the Galls, p. 153). Thorfinn, the Earl of Orkney, 
when he conquered the nine 4 rikis ' in Scotland in 1034, included in his possessions Dali or 
Ergadia, and Gaddgedli or Galloway, and in the same year the Irish Annals record the death 
of 4 Suibhne mac Cinaeda ri Gallgaidel.' Though Thorfinn's kingdom in Scotland termin- 
ated in 1604, when it is said that 4 many rikis which he had subjected fell off, and their in- 
habitants sought the protection of those native chiefs who were territorially born to rule over 
them' {Coll. de Reb. Alb., p. 346), the Norwegians appear to have retained a hold of Erga- 
dia and Galwedia for nearly a century after, as we find in the Irish Annals mention made in 
1 1 54 of the fleets of Gallgaedel, Arann, Cintyre, Mann, and the Centair Alban, or seaboard 
of Alban, under the command of Macscelling, a Norwegian {Annals of the Four Masters, 
1 1 54). Mac Vurich likewise states that before Somerled's time, 4 all the islands from Man- 
nan (Man) to Area (Orkneys), and all the bordering country from Dun Breatan (Dumbarton) 
to Cata (Caithness) in the north, were in the possession of the Lochlannach (Norwegians), 
and such as remained of the Gaedel of those lands protected themselves in the woods or 
mountains' ; and in narrating the exploits of Somerled, he says ' he did not cease till he 
had cleared the western side of Alban from the Lochlannach.' 

44 It seems probable, therefore, that the natives of Ergadia and Gallwallia had risen 
under Somerled and Fergus, and had finally expelled the Norwegians from their coasts, and 
that owing to the long possession of the country by the Norwegians, all trace of their parent- 
age had disappeared from the annals of the country, and they were viewed as the founders 
of a new race of native lords. 

44 The two districts appear, however, closely connected with each other in the various 
attempts made by the Gaedheal against the ruling authority in Scotland." — Skene, Fordun y 
vol. ii., p. 431. 

36 Much less equivocal are the remains of Scandinavian occupation preserved in the place- 
names of the south-west. Many hills still bear the title 44 fell" — the Norse fjall — often 
pleonastically prefixed to the Gaelic barr, as in Fell o' Barhullion, in Glasserton parish, or 
disguised as a mere suffix, as in Criffel. The well-known test-syllable by, a village, farm, or 
dwelling, so characteristic of Danish rather than of Norse occupation, takes the place in 
southern districts which bolstadr holds in northern. Lockerby, the dwelling of Locard or 

264 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

Lockhart, Canonbie, and Middlebie in Dumfriesshire — Busby, Sorby, and Corsbie in Wig- 
tonshire — are instances in point. Vik, a creek or small bay, gives the name to Southwick 
parish and Senwick {sand vik, sandy bay) ; and n'es, a cape, appears in Sinniness {sunnr 
n'es, south point) and Borness {borh ries, burgh or fort point) ; but Auchness is in another 
language, being the Gaelic each inis, horse-pasture. Pastoral occupation is implied in Fair- 
girth (faer gardr, sheep-fold) ; but Cogarth, the cow-pen, is more probably Saxon than 
Scandinavian, for though in modern Danish " cow" is ho, in old Norse it was kyr. Tin- 
wald, like Dingwall in the north, is \>inga vollr, the assembly-field, and Mouswald, most 
vollr, the moss-field. — Maxwell, Dumfries and Galloway, pp. 44, 45. 



RETURNING again to the subject of Macbeth's so-called usurpation, it 
may be stated that, in addition to the causes already suggested as 
leading to his revolt, we find another reason given by some of the early 
chroniclers in apparent justification of his conduct in slaying Duncan 
and possessing himself of that ruler's kingdom. This explanation is, that 
Macbeth's wife, Gruoch, was the daughter of that Boete (or Boedhe) 
MacKenneth whose son was slain by King Malcolm MacKenneth about 
1033, in order to prepare the way for the peaceable ascension to the throne 
of his own daughter's son, Duncan. 1 

The title of Boete's heirs to the crown, according to the customary order 
of descent at that time, was superior to that of Malcolm's heirs. There- 
fore, it has been contended that, as Malcolm had wrongfully removed 
Boete's son by killing him, and thus made the way clear for the succession 
of his own grandson, it was not unnatural that the claims of the latter should 
be contested by the other heirs of Boete and their representatives. 9 Besides 
the son whom Malcolm killed, Boete had left also a daughter, Gruoch, who 
married into the family of the Mormaors of Moray, carrying her claims with 
her. Her husband, Gilcomgain mac Maelbrigdi mac Ruaidhri, was slain in 
a family quarrel, but left a son by Gruoch, named Lulach, an infant, who 
thus represented the line of King Kenneth MacDuff. Gruoch next married 
Macbeth mac Finley mac Ruaidhri, (second cousin to Gilcomgain) who had 
succeeded to the mormaorship of Moray. By the hitherto prevalent Pictish 
system of alternation, Lulach was the rightful king ; and as guardian and 
representative of his stepson, Macbeth stood for the child's claims on the 
Scottish crown, as against Duncan, son of Malcolm's daughter, Bethoc, by 
Crinan. 3 

Macbeth reigned for about seventeen years, and the contemporary re- 
cords of the period all seem to indicate that his rule was one of considerable 
benefit to the kingdom. 4 In 1045 an attempt was made by Crinan, the 
father of Duncan, to dethrone Macbeth ; but it proved abortive, resulting in 
the death of Crinan 5 and, in consequence, the more secure possession of 
the crown by Macbeth. In 1050 the latter made a pilgrimage to Rome." 

In 1054, Siward, the Danish earl of Northumbria, a close connection of 
the family of Duncan, 7 led an army into Scotland against Macbeth, in the 
interests of Duncan's son, Malcolm, and perhaps at the instance of Edward, 
King of England. 8 Although not then successful in recovering the central 
kingdom, Siward succeeded in confirming Malcolm as ruler of all that por- 
tion of Scotland south of the Clyde and Forth." Siward died in 1055, how- 
ever, and Malcolm was not able to push his cause further until 1057. In 


266 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

that year he formed an alliance with Tostig, who was the son of Earl God' 
win and successor to Siward as ruler of Northumberland. Then taking ad- 
vantage of the death of Thornnn, Macbeth's most powerful coadjutor, the 
allies again entered the domain of the latter and on the 15th of August, 
1057, Malcolm killed Macbeth in battle at Lumphanan. 10 

Malcolm then ascended the throne. Having married Ingiborg, widow of 
Thornnn, he seems soon afterwards to have united the different states of the 
north into the single kingdom of Scotia. Within a few years he became so 
powerful as to attempt the invasion of England. 11 In 1068-9, Ingiborg ap- 
parently having died in the meantime, he married Margaret, 18 sister of Edgar 
vEtheling, the Saxon heir to the English crown, who with his family and fol- 
lowers, had been driven out of England after the coming of the Normans in 
1066, and had taken refuge in Scotland. 

This King Malcolm is known in history as Malcolm Canmore, so named 
from the size of his head, the Celtic words " cean mohr " meaning " head 
big." The possession of the Anglian province of Northumbria known as 
Lothian, which had been ceded to his great-grandfather, Malcolm mac Ken- 
neth, after the battle of Carham in 10 18, in Malcolm Canmore, became defi- 
nitely confirmed to the crown of Scotland. 13 This union resulted in bringing 
under one government the Teutonic races of the eastern, northern, and 
western coasts, and the Celtic Gaels and Cymri of Galloway, Strathclyde, 
and Scotia proper. Malcolm's marriages, first with Ingiborg the Norse 
jarl's widow, and secondly, with Margaret, daughter of the Saxon royal 
family, may be taken as presaging the union of races that was to follow in 
Scotland. 14 As the most substantial and enduring attributes of Scottish 
civilization owe their origin to this amalgamation, and are in a great measure 
due to the infusion of Teutonic blood into the veins of the Celt, we cannot 
do better in this connection than to consider at length the nature and extent 
of the English elements entering into the composition of the feudal 

Having already sketched the rise and progress of the Norwegian power 
in the north and west, one considerable source of the Teutonic stream, it 
now remains only to inquire into the history of Northumbria, the northern 
province of which in Malcolm's time became firmly united with Scotland, 
forming the modern counties of Haddington, Roxburgh, Linlithgow, Edin- 
burgh, Berwick, etc. It has been deemed proper to give this history in the 
form of extracts from the early annals relating to Britain and Northumbria, 
so far as these are preserved in the history of Gildas, the works of Bede, and 
in the English Chronicle, these three being our chief authorities for early 
English history. Inasmuch as the record of the English conquest of North 
Britain does not begin until the year 547, the history of the preceding cen- 
tury — aside from the brief descriptions of Nennius already given, and similar 
references to be found in the Welsh Book of the Princes (Brut y Tywy- 
sogion), and the Annates Cambrice — can only be inferred from such records 

The Angles 267 

as remain of the earlier English conquest of the southern portions of the 

The history of Gildas was written about 556-560 ; that of Bede about 
731 ; and the English or Anglo-Saxon Chronicle is the work of various hands 
between Bede's time and the middle of the twelfth century, the earliest 
copies extant bearing evidences of a date some years prior to 900. 


§ 2X. Then all the councillors, together with that proud tyrant Gurth- 
rigern [Vortigern], the British king, were so blinded, that, as a protection to 
their country, they sealed its doom by inviting in among them (like wolves 
into the sheep-fold) the fierce and impious Saxons, a race hateful both to God 
and men, to repel the invasions of the northern nations. Nothing was ever 
so pernicious to our country, nothing was ever so unlucky. What palpable 
darkness must have enveloped their minds — darkness desperate and cruel J 
Those very people whom, when absent, they dreaded more than death itself, 
were invited to reside, as one may say, under the selfsame roof. Foolish 
are the princes, as it is said, of Thafneos, giving counsel to unwise Pharaoh. 
A multitude of whelps came forth from the lair of this barbaric lioness, in 
three cyu/s, as they call them, that is, in three ships of war, with their sails 
wafted by the wind and with omens and prophecies favorable, for it was 
foretold by a certain soothsayer among them, that they should occupy the 
country to which they were sailing three hundred years, and half of that 
time, a hundred and fifty years, should plunder and despoil the same. They 
first landed on the eastern side of the island, by the invitation of the unlucky 
king, and there fixed their sharp talons, apparently to fight in favor of the 
island, but, alas ! more truly against it. Their mother-land, finding her first 
brood thus successful, sends forth a larger company of her wolfish offspring, 
which, sailing over, join themselves to their bastard-born comrades. From 
that time the germ of iniquity and the root of contention planted their poison 
amongst us, as we deserved, and shot forth into leaves and branches. The 
barbarians being thus introduced as soldiers into the island, to encounter, as 
they falsely said, any dangers in defence of their hospitable entertainers, 
obtain an allowance of provisions, which, for some time being plentifully 
bestowed, stopped their doggish mouths. Yet they complain that their 
monthly supplies are not furnished in sufficient abundance, and they indus- 
triously aggravate each occasion of quarrel, saying that unless more liberality 
is shown them, they will break the treaty and plunder the whole island. In 
a short time, they follow up their threats with deeds. 

§ 24. For the fire of vengeance, justly kindled by former crimes, spread 
from sea to sea, fed by the hands of our foes in the east, and did not cease,, 
until, destroying the neighboring towns and lands, it reached the other side 
of the island, and dipped its red and savage tongue in the western ocean. 
In these assaults, therefore, not unlike that of the Assyrian upon Judea, was 
fulfilled in our case what the prophet describes in words of lamentation : 
" They have burned with fire the sanctuary ; they have polluted on earth the 
tabernacle of thy name." And again, " O God, the Gentiles have come into 
thine inheritance ; Thy holy temple have they defiled," etc. So that all the 
columns were levelled with the ground by the frequent strokes of the 

* See also pp. 200-202. 

268 The Scotch-Irish Families of America 

battering-ram, all the husbandmen routed, together with their bishops, 

priests, and people, whilst the sword gleamed, and the frames crackled 

around them on every side. Lamentable to behold, in the midst of the 

streets lay the tops of lofty towers, tumbled to the ground, stones of high 

walls, holy altars, fragments of human bodies, covered with livid clots of 

coagulated blood, looking as if they had been squeezed together in a press ; 

and with no chance of being buried, save in the ruins of the houses, or in 

the ravening bellies of wild beasts and birds ; with reverence be it spoken 

. for their blessed souls, if, indeed, there were many found who were carried, 

J at that time, into the high heaven by the holy angels. So entirely had the 

' vintage, once so fine, degenerated and become bitter, that, in the words of 

the prophet, there was hardly a grape or ear of corn to be seen where the 

husbandman had turned his back. 

§ 25. Some, therefore, of the miserable remnant, being taken in the 
mountains, were murdered in great numbers ; others, constrained by famine, 
came and yielded themselves to be slaves for ever to their foes, running the 
risk of being instantly slain, which truly was the greatest favor that could 
be offered them : some others passed beyond the seas with loud lamentations 
instead of the voice of exhortation. " Thou hast given us as sheep to be 
slaughtered, and among the Gentiles hast thou dispersed us." Others, com- 
mitting the safeguard of their lives, which were in continual jeopardy, to the 
mountains, precipices, thickly wooded forests, and to the rocks of the seas 
(albeit with trembling hearts), remained still in their country. 16 But in the 
meanwhile, an opportunity happening, when these most cruel robbers were 
returned home, the poor remnants of our nation (to whom flocked from 
divers places round about our miserable countrymen as fast as bees to their 
hives, for fear of an ensuing storm), being strengthened by God, calling upon 
him with all their hearts, as the poet says, " With their unnumbered vows 
they burden heaven," that they might not be brought to utter destruction, 
took arms under the conduct of Ambrosius Aurelianus, a modest man, who 
of all the Roman nation was then alone in the confusion of this troubled 
period by chance left alive. His parents, who for their merit were adorned 
with the purple, had been slain in these same broils, and now his progeny in 
these our days, although shamefully degenerated from the worthiness of their 
ancestors, provoke to battle their cruel conquerors, and by the goodness of 
our Lord obtain the victory. 

§ 26. After this, sometimes our countrymen, sometimes the enemy, won 
the field, to the end that our Lord might in this land try after his accustomed 
manner these his Israelites, whether they loved him or not, until the year of 
the siege of Bath-hill, when took place also the last almost, though not the 
least slaughter of our cruel foes, which was (as I am sure) forty-four years 
and one month after the landing of the Saxons, and also the time of my own 
nativity. And yet neither to this day are the cities of our country inhabited 
as before, but being forsaken and overthrown, still lie desolate ; our foreign 
wars having ceased, but our civil troubles still remaining. For as well the 
remembrance of such a terrible desolation of the island, as also of the unex- 
pected recovery of the same, remained in the minds of those who were 
eye-witnesses of the wonderful events of both, and in regard thereof, kings, 
public magistrates, and private persons, with priests and clergymen, did all 
and every one of them live orderly according to their several vocations. 
But when these had departed out of this world, and a new race succeeded, 
who were ignorant of this troublesome time, and had only experience of the 
present prosperity, all the laws of truth and justice were so shaken and 

The Angles 269 

subverted that not so much as a vestige or remembrance of these virtues 
remained among the above-named orders of men, except among a very few 
who, compared with the great multitude which were daily rushing head- 
long down to hell, are accounted so small a number, that our reverend 
mother the church, scarcely beholds them, her only true children, reposing 
in her bosom. 


§ 57. (Bernicia) — Woden begat Beldeg, who begat Beornec, who begat 
Gethbrond, who begat Aluson, who begat Ingwi, who begat Edibrith, who 
begat Esa, who begat Eoppa, who begat Ida. But Ida had twelve sons, 
Adda, Belric, Theodric, Ethelric, Theodhere, Osmer, and one queen, Bear- 
noch, Ealric. Ethelric begat Ethelfrid : the same is Aedlfred Flesaur. For 
he also had seven sons, Eanfrid, Oswald, Oswin, Oswy, Oswudu, Oslac, Offa. 
Oswy begat Alfrid, Elfwin, and Ecgfrid. Ecgfrid is he who made war against 
his cousin Brudei, king of the Picts, and he fell therein with all the strength 
of his army, and the Picts with their king gained the victory ; and the Saxons 
never again reduced the Picts so as to exact tribute from them. Since the 
time of this war it is called Gueithlin Garan. 

But Oswy had two wives, Riemmelth, the daughter of Royth, son of 
Rum ; and Eanfled, the daughter of Edwin, son of Alia. 

§ 58. (Kent) — Hengist begat Octa, who begat Ossa, who begat Eormen- 
ric, who begat Ethelbert, who begat Eadbald, who begat Ercombert, who 
begat Egbert. 

§ 59. (East Anglia) — Woden begat Casser, who begat Titinon, who begat 
Trigil, who begat Rodmunt, who begat Rippa, who begat Guillem Guercha, 
[Uffa, or Wuffa] who was the first king of the East Angles. Guercha begat 
Uffa, who begat Tytillus, who begat Eni, who begat Edric, who begat Ald- 
wulf, who begat Elric. 

§ 60. (Mercia) — Woden begat Guedolgeat, who begat Gueagon, who 
begat Guithleg, who begat Guerdmund, who begat Ossa, who begat Ongen